The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMASTER PLAN CITY CLERK •Y ��WPORr O � u z CgGI FOFN\e' December 20, 1957 Honorable City Council City of Newport Beach Newport Beach, California Madam Mayor and Gentlemen: Your City Planning Commission herewith submits to you for your consideration and action a comprehensives long-term general plan for the physical develop- ment of the City of Newport Beach and land outside its present boundaries which in the Commission's current judgment bears a relation to internal City Planning. This action by the Planning Commission is in compliance with the requirements of the City Charter. This plan is designated and referred to herein as the Master Plan. Hahn, Wise and Associates, Planning Consultants were employed by you to prepare this Master Plan. Hahn, Wise and Associates submitted to the Planning Commission a proposed Master Plan under date of May 23, 1957. Copies of the proposed Master Plan were submitted to the following: 1. County of Orange 2. City of Costa Mesa 3. Newport Beach Elementary School District 4 Newport Harbor High School District 5. Orange Coast College 6. The Irvine Company 7. Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission 8. Departments and Officials of the City of Newport Beach 9. Citizens' Advisory Committee All were asked to give the Master Plan their careful study and submit to the Planning Commission their recommendations for any changes in the Plan. r • Page 2 Attached hereto are the following documents designated as exhibits: Exhibit A - Original draft of the Master Plan as prepared by Hahn, Wise and Associates Exhibit B - Changes in original draft of the Master Plan by Hahn, Wise and Associates as shown by following: 1. Land Use Map . 2. Street and Highway Map 3. Parks and Recreation Map Exhibit C - Recommendations of the Planning Commission for the County of Orange Exhibit D - Recommendations of the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission of the City of Newport Beach Exhibit E - Communication from the City of Costa Mesa • Exhibit� F - Communication from the Newport Harbor High School Exhibit G - Exchange of correspondence with the Newport Beach Elementary School District Exhibit_ H - Transcript of Public Hearings on Master Plan by Planning Commission The report of the Citizens' Advisory Committee is already on file with the City, hence is not attached herewith as an exhibit. Several requests soliciting recommendations were made to the Irvine Company. so far they have not submitted any suggestions for changes or objections to the portions of the Master Plan which may affect their properties. As a result of conferences with representatives of the Irvine Company by the Planning Consultants and representatives of the Planning Commission, the Industrial Park Area and some other projections were incorporated in the original draft of the Master Plan, The Commission realizes that during the period of time the Master Plan has been under study, the officials of the Irvine Company have been very busy and occupied in working out plans for the location of the first industrial plant, the Aeronutronic Systems, Inc., in the Industrial Park Area so designated in the Master Plan. It is the opinion of the Planning Commission that the Irvine Co, at this time should not be pressed for recommendations as no doubt several factors may have to be resolved before they can formulate or concur in an overall Master Plan for the development of their properties. The Irvine Co. has r Page 3 been most cooperative with the Planning Commission in planning developments on their properties. Therefore, the Planning Commission recommends that the Master Plan be considered as herewith submitted with the provision that the portions affecting them be continued under study and amendments mutually agreed upon be made yearly. The Master Plan as proposed herewith consists of three units of planning for the City. They are as follows: I. Land Use II. Streets and Highways III. Parks and Recreation Hahn, Wise and Associates have included in the Master Plan a considerable amount of basic data and statistics which are valuable material as a guide for the Planning Commission and the City Council in resolving current and future problems in growth and expansion of the City of Newport Beach. The Planning Commission submits to you the revised Master Plan with the following recommendations. I. Land Use Plan Review of the proceedings of the public hearings on this Master Plan indicates that the property owners generally throughout the City do not desire any changes in the designated land uses now existing as precisely zoned by the present zoning code. 1. The Planning Commission recommends that this Master Plan continue the land uses which are designated by precise zoning in the existing zoning code or as may be amended. 2. The Planning Commission recommends that the Master Plan land uses for those areas within and adjoining the City not now precisely zoned be approved. 3. The Planning Commission has reached the conclusion that better planning can be accomplished for existing precisely zoned areas by studies and constructive revision of present zoning in sections when and where needed. There are some areas within the City which are being affected by changing conditions, increasing land values, small-sized lots and crowded residential uses. There are some commercial areas which are adversely affected by traffic problems and lack of parking facilities. If an adequate Planning Staff is maintained, it will be-possible to accomplish better planning results by giving adequate studies to each local area needing attention. • Page 4 The Planning Consultants and the Planning Commission have. prepared a series of amendments to the Zoning Code. Changing conditions and new problems warrants a complete review of the Zoning Code which has been done. Also, it is considered advis- able to revise and increase the restrictions and requirements of the Code. Public hearings on these proposed amendments are now on the calendar. II. Street and Highway Plan The Planning Consultants and the Planning Commission after studying the Orange County Master Plan of Highways, the recommendations of the Orange County Planning Commission, and the recommendations of D. Jackson Faustman, recommend the Master Plan of Streets and Highways as developed up to this time. A committee consisting of Commissioners Wesley Smith, Ray Y. Copelin and George J. Lind, and Director of Public Works, J. B. Webb have spent much time and effort on this plan. This Committee's Report which the Commission has approved is attached for- your information. In making this recommendation, it is the considered opinion of the Commission that further studies should be immediately continued. The traffic and park- ing problems are far from being satisfactorily solved. The increase of population and numbers of cars will cause a con- tinuous increase of new traffic problems. Off-street parking requirements in the Zoning Code are to be materially increased in proposed amendments to the Zoning Code now on the Commission' s agenda of public hearings. III. Parks and Recreation The City Charter provides for the creation and operation of a Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission. The Master Plan was submitted to this Commission. Its recommendations were particularly solicited for the reason that the Planning Commission desired the draft of the Parks and Recreation phase of the Master Plan be satisfactory to it. The Planning Consultants consulted frequently with the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission. Their recommendations were submitted under date of October 23, 1957, and is attached herewith as Exhibit D. Also attached is a report of a Committee of Planning Commissioners Galvin R. Keene, C. B. Rudd and 0. B. Reed under date of November 8, 1957. The Planning Consultants have revised their proposal for this phase of the Master Plan to conform to the recommendations of the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission on the major projects covered with the following exceptions and additions, namely: Page 5 1. The Planning Consultants revised some portions of the language of Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission recommendations primarily for clarification and legal purposes. 2. The recommendations of the Orange County Planning Commission contained in Exhibit C attached varies materially from the recommendations of Mr. Wise regard- ing recreation facilities in the areas immediately adjacent to the Upper Bay water front districts. The City Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission did not make any recommendations in its report for such facilities in those districts. The Orange County Planning Commission bases its suggestions on the premises that such waterfront recreation facilities should be so located and planned to serve large regional areas and the general public. Mr. Wise does not agree with this conception entirely. He contends that when the Irvine Co. develops the land areas around the Upper Bay for residential uses which will contain a large population, several small waterfront park and recreation facilities should be provided for those residents. A large water park is now being developed in a portion of the Upper Bay adjacent to 101 Highway by the County. The Planning Commission agrees with Mr. Wise's point of view. However, the Irvine Co. has not yet expressed an attitude on this matter. The Commission recommends that the Upper Bay waterfront park and recreation areas as proposed by Mr. Wise in the Master Plan be approved. Also that these plans be subject to further study with consultations among the County Planning Commission, the Irvine Co. , the Harbor Commission and the City of Newport Beach to develop ultimate plans satisfactory to all parties concerned. The development of waterfront and its uses should be coordinated with the development and uses of adjoining land areas. The Master Plan population growth projections indicate that in the years ahead the major portion of the population of the City of Newport Beach will exist around and east of the Upper Bay. Careful planning by the Irvine Co. , The City of Newport and other Governmental agencies is of the utmost importance in the years ahead for the best possible residential, commercial and industrial development of those land areas also appropriate uses of and accesses to the water areas of the Upper Bay. Page 6 The Commission regrets the delay in submitting the Master Plan to you with the Commission's recommendations. The organizations which expressed desires to submit suggestions, consumed considerable time in the preparation of their recommendations. The Commission deemed it advisable to await the receipt of all the reports it was possible to obtain. The Commission wishes to call your attention to the important provisions contained in this Master Plan which is quoted as follows: (D. recommendations- Paragraph 9, Page 13) "The Planning Commission, and its advisory bodies, should review the Master Plan annually and formulate any amendments made necessary by changing conditions. These amendments should be made an official part of the Master Plan by the procedures outlined above." The Planning Commission respectfully herewith files with you the Master Plan, the attached documents and this letter of transmittal for your consideration and action which the Commission hopes will be favorable. The Master Plan herewith was adopted by the Planning Commission in a legally Constituted meeting December 19, 1957. Sincerely yours, PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF NEWPORT fie W. M. Lo a r, Chairman Ray Y. 96pelin, Secretary WLL:hh i MASTER PLAN OF PARKS AND RECREATION 'S t . t. I 1 I OF LEGEND NT.`S PORT l3l�t�(;�) , "y r mow. Existing Proposed • , • CALIFORNIA Elementary School ® ❑ Intermediate School �� uasr ® O High School - � �-- % JANUARY . 1957 ❑ Community Center Building Community Park HAHN WISE 9 ASSOCIATES j � �� ... • ' PLANNING CONSULTANTS C Neighborhood Park Playground Do A Community Area Community Boundary 0 Neighborhood /' �_F- >. �/ '� / �1A/ O o-- -\ Neighborhood Boundary\ I G � Aquatic Park x View Park 0 - ❑ ❑ _ _- 0, O If - 7�� - ft�. ] a _ roit ///�\\ / R \ / 00 / �I � y r / I I "`dam►'-,��. Ice <� 1 Rv '✓ dop �� 'fir -� 'J✓ [J• � \� r . rOT / `,Ls--K=.`iC_ l�'-�II '�—�--YCm¢ fQ� . . / H E W PORT : �j ' PAC/F/C OCEAN 'v1 Te' o C EAN PA C/F/C I "H (43 TY' OF, MASTER LAND USE PLAN ( PRELIM/NARY) J �- - uewroni ,e�• \ `, N1:Wh /) RT BEACH l CALIFORNIA \ o L / L E G E N D oo eSOL lL \ =. � / II \ SCALE IN fEEI JANUARY , 1957 0 Single Family Res idential ✓'hl 7f Multi le Residential / \ HAHN WISE H ASSOCIATES �\ / PLANNING- CONSULTANTS C" Number indicates Zone ® Professional ,; Apartments . , /may II Commercial J �: y v I Number indicates Zone % - ��— -__� , C_ � / N-H � I / p ffTM Industrial Park � � f� l - , D _ J citz A A- All jlj� ',� ��t...of I G•,.., 11 _1_, I �Y I - jI 1L1 .Ll ' �l ae�� //'�1 �,•,•.5 / •��\ �� __ �C� �� '`JnG! �'at�.1J .�• _ j i ' ( vlfdwt-J �. I� _�J� •' ij / • h .� V' N +�. ,�Pi a 'C ip.•<' l° x7• i.,, , ., /,ii" •• �::I F �r�(s i• �� •ti•� �" w� / A. • b �C .�`�� i �� I.��I I�"u• �'r 0�� I.a �•l • ��- '1_b._•.1 �-(J • `� vim ., ( �i i!. U J�^7 �/". �•� /y" �� Mi• .A�' f� z>`�"222�»! ��r �� y ! �I k.��V��'� c �..a• �\ �I > { p Z ;- �1 A. �� -/ /� i 1,I,r� �N :'�J�A' Iky {S i tJ �fh �' //�� i �I$EN�I�('y" .."• �....W `` 1 II �L � 1 � )�I'•IO //• �` •'.! • i�n ^�• • ' . 'C.11.Y'f. •.J� •t , Il t— J f 15 II�r1 C�m �.� .t. V �.•'• „y •. ar �-'A a:is^y, .ten/ J d•iS�/y �-CJ w — � ,...�� 1 �r�Y• ��d I � �� /�� !� ��'i F'v"ra.IF" i f.��VA dj:E1 t.. •�z.� ��i.� � �Z :La f-.�-�l� � !�rI L.�� L �� Q'Si. �. "� •, �.;' 111v ..�"• "� s � illy �\� •�/ :1 I 7. �..v..• 2-BY ��:0 'JT . �� a ill �Ili rr �(� ��,� , . j. � � �" •�'i` I C a I. �—-_'�»"'"`-_;� % yS+f•'�i� _ —__ — — _ �,If � :. r `s .. ��'� I �."� � .., � � • a; 7 � � _ . - �H - .,. „� .��.�.•>>`S ! A�=`•�',,/�/�`�/ yr�o;, ��.��-�.�L!I.��4 ��11 h I� L�I��I '', I � � �;, �� /'•''y�T:n A�"��°1�+,a*�`� �,;:�• � ^�` v�a •� „ ! - ' 1, •� .�� l[.,'F Y2'RL ..� .. . .�J,•. 2• a. � ..�, .Z�.,� � � �• •«.a?'r' --i `�• +4si,,,r.4� a"�;''�Ib �. ��hs��s; � ��. J��- -,. �,� �.�� ,�. �,,L,. � � ,—�� ,��,n �� _,.«r-.N.�- I �� VA, ,� �� , •y'Y�.= d. -.".�rl:':'„-. b > /3 i - „, 1� � 1 1,� ate. I �� c �'� I• - -. -ram.. o i 3a 7 U/,�: n �� t� -q ''4 '`-pi':- � I 'n' � •�_� ^� •3 � � d •T,f�,/?- „�(.� iq' �'� } .l L<� � 1ffi_ �� 1. � �i�� .. J -T ti' �n � saw. mod' � I � , ' IA � � -a I 4 .,..• / � t...• ... 11 ry_ �.0 i Imo-- �._.•..' • °.(•n . n_.� NEWw. FORT t«�� CEA •• N .p� lr :•sa J� : Rom-;:' `k A. OCEAN PACIFIC r � { _ A � - � - _ - _ - r � : - �i�' f2R'�"f%t � 0.R�- X�5 N "iF I� ��'C��'PH"ft�'LI��yS�•�S.AI ^'. �' S�kEV2 _ � _ _ _ - _ - �, sY�, vs.«a ' iv,�.vr.. u:,y,?' �,'nl du. ',CS 3�,f'6 Y ,h'� . ,A.. >• '� k ';�. MASTER STREET & HIGHWAY PLAN . . . T y / � a (, Ili OF i 7 ( PRELIMINARY J / f NHWIORT_. N EWP1)IZT l3l: A (iII 9 LEGEND T f �� h CALIF/OR NIA FREEWAY 0 5u0 200C ?500i00 Ii 3000 1 $LICE IH FEET MAJOR STREETS (FOUR LANES UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTE_\ JANUARY , 1957 00*0000 SECONDARY STREETS (TKO LANES) �� +rl �� '- - - ., - /� I g tii ' ` HAHN , WISE 8 ASSOCIATES `_ . ,' I ` PLANNING CONSULTANTS OTHER STREETS �� "� &� _� �� = � T. L T TRUCK ROUTES " %mm goo � - - PROPOSED STREETS 400 •• « M TRAFFIC DIRECTION LANES � � � // 4i'�� • ••� �� 1 T I A. � .. tom_ - , • T �`'� �� 1� '"" -ham ".• _,_ �' ^.. �:'-' _ a Oil gow ". i� _ H •�.• i I L,_ 5 .icon. Pn �� I � �i i • ,. _- A fill - . 4000 moop / �•. _ % / Owo i s . 1 •, • •'�✓,ra r �} ' .,�� ---,�'_ _ �inn �l� cL _� �• ' A. •, �. � � a v� • ,• t •= : �' °°'n''r+r.._r C' 'w, a ."'fo ! ��" - Il / / .1 I� a T "J .•: . pry. r4v..e..� W.. Ti • de .•, low A {-.j• \/{/v. %. g ,..,nub• T i" - ; T , T 0 sop, goo • e°✓g�� %, I / ' •l. T �}s:+v��' _ q„•.. 4` ''s\ ie.�,,r "� i �- al �l�-� t\ \ '.. /t •_ \\ \ �w�,� g_� ( �I p(1 T/ 411 � y� L1s • I � .-�� i v��W �I ��,j i�,. c'`J� •�� i ,>nLll 9 � / I I I,> i�i-A it I'�k, � 'i ¢ rs� j ' •I. i� _,� '/ -,, i6 5� v�). "_�Ji /i -.v\ •\ I "� sue` \� \• > _.- 1 "� F '� ; \,A• l� �� i _y - •�,� �, '.�, �� •C1_�L��.f - r� s�•� � / I I — , _ 1 !I � F\ �t Fj% ,`-i F�9• p' �� rIf � Ll \ T �/ i ~ \• �!� �- I 11 il. \\. • fit \ `,\\\ �, '�\ '•.�. �I/�� Y1�v�l_'� irl'�' r] ;�^J; t Y`'x"'_- �*y T ( ,.A, p �+t\'�, ?>��A •s —:r��L 1' ° - ..�L �' �I e '1:�� ` £ i •vim Viz; y i; �c . •R��' "\�•\ �1-v4�' •i - i ./b• jl ?i' - � T T •i. ,VA �A l ��` fOk'' -Li ) ( • ^ r`.J y�o � � i."�' a..,, .. •�� ' _ ,_ '�/ S.A — , .. ., . . ' t2 ''4� i ��n r� ,�> gA Y T �P.� T _ ,r J�� Z �iA re. - 1.�- 7� 1 �. ••..'� p_ -- � N •'•. � :��• �� 1,S� �I Fjj— bJ�� . �� , {� w.t��•�.^.A �N � 11• ... _i ., —T ��. _ - �''�7 ✓ /� �� _i ••r I I i '� I �'^ t x \r•�� A�i��"5.3 •• ' ° r- ' �•.. • a�h 9 - '"�,. "+g Irr. //yp�, A t'� 1.1,rt; I�i �� ' � `'n I j� .c '1 r ..w .�' •�� _�=�(�� - �:. � r •. '� 555 i Awr 1.. �� . . . _ .�.- ,_ - . . . ��r >,e ,�-��f1��T �\� .u+� '•�1�! �. �y Sw�I,;yJ� II I� I ��i � ., `�- -"�- ��,.a � .s y-,_. r"._ _ aT" - .� sa�••.• � r-�� ,�O. .r' � � . "� , /. ' � / � i'�e .°e �� . `��( '�,�'-•`� )g'r - � �` S . ..� a - ` � �t• .•.. ,..- .. t \.. .I�E '� H 4 h�r�� •� i � _ �T<� :i`i`�S � "-_r""• y� ;�pia v �� . ,, it 5 / •a•`' I j NEW p 0 OCEAN OCEAN ` .truer;" PACIFIC G � I I y. M EXHIBIT 11C11 REPORT ON THE PROPOSED NEWPORT BEACH MASTER PLAN OF 1957 PREPARED BY THE ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT • TO THE NEWPORT BEACH CITY PLANNING COMMISSION: The following report deals only with those portions of the proposed plan which are primarily of County interest as expressed by actions of the Orange County Harbor Commission and the Orange County Planning Commission. On August 12, 1957, the Orange County Harbor Commission by formal action approved the following recommendations: MASTER STREET AND HIGHWAY PLAN 1. BAYSIDE DRIVE Bayside Drive from Pacific Coast Highway 101A to Jamboree Road at the northerly end of Upper Newport Bay should be given further study as to alignment and width in relation to development of abutting property and this portion of the Upper Bay which it will serve. This route acts as a collector for other major routes shown on the plan and is the direct route between proposed recreational areas . When • such study has been made and its alignment and width deter- mined the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways should be amended to conform. 2. IRVINE AVENUE Irvine Avenue should be classified as a major street, having not less than four traffic lanes from Orange Coast Freeway to Jamboree Road around the northerly end of Upper Newport Bay. 3. SANTA ISABEL AVENUE Santa Isabel Avenue should be classified as a major street, having not less than four traffic lanes from Harbor Boulevard to Irvine Avenue in vicinity of Upper Bay Aquatic Park. This route, together with Irvine Avenue, will carry high volumes of traffic to and from the Aquatic Park and should be devel- oped to adequate standards. Santa Isabel Avenue is shown as a four lane traffic route on the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways. �+. MESA DRIVE Mesa Drive, as shown on the proposed Newport Beach Master Plan, appears to be a more satisfactory through -route than Del Mar Avenue, and it is therefore recommended that the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways be amended to conform with the proposed Newport Beach Master Plan in respect to Mesa Drive. Aip • Report on Proposed Newport Beach Master Plan of 1957 Page 2 MASTER PLAN OF PARKS AND RECREATION AQUATIC PARKS 1. It is recommended that three proposed aquatic parks be removed from the Newport Beach Master Plan, as follows; (a) The Aquatic Park shown on the northerly side of the main channel to Upper Newport Bay north of the High Level Bridge: Ultimate boat traffic in this channel will approximate that now in the Harbor entrance and cause conflicts and hazards with the use of this property for water recreation. Vehicular access to the area below the bluffs will be difficult. Its close proximity to the County Water Recreation Area (Harry Welch Park) minimizes its need at this location. (b) The two Aquatic Parks shown on the easterly side of Upper Newport Bay; one- at the'mouth of'Big Canyon; the other near Shellmaker Island just north of the County Water Recreation Area (Harry Welch Park) : Access to these areas would be through areas designated by the Master Plan of Newport Beach as residential, to place active recreation at these locations would further congest the roads in the vicinity of the county water recreation area now under development. It is recommended that in the elimination of the two aquatic parks on the easterly side of Upper Newport Bay as publicly owned recreation areas, consideration be given to marine recreational facilities, such as boat basins, in the detailed planning of the Upper Bay. 2. The Aquatic Park shown on the westerly side of Upper Newport Bay in the vicinity of 23rd Street and Irvine Avenue is a desirable location. Its accessibility and natural terrain makes it readily adaptable and feasible of development. Its location makes it convenient to a large segment of population to the north and west, particularly if the recommendations under Master Street and Highway Plans are carried out. Report on Proposed Newport Beach Master Plan of 1957 Page 3 3. The proposed Newport Beach Master Plan shows two Aquatic Parks at the extreme northerly end of Upper Newport Bay; one in the vicinity of Delhi Flood Control Channel; the other near the intersection of Mesa Drive and Jamboree Road. It is recommended that these two Aquatic Park Areas be joined and substantially expanded into one large regional public park. This location at the northerly end of Upper Newport Bay and the highway pattern adjoining this area makes it more readily available to inland population than other locations on the bay. Large numbers of people could enjoy water recreation facilities here without becoming involved in the traffic in the more developed areas of Newport Harbor. PUBLIC VIEW SITE AREAS • It is recommended that studies be made for providing public vista sites or areas along the bluffs on each side of Upper Newport Bay: Such sites were often referred to as "Windows 'to the Bay" by the late Harry Welch. Upper Newport Say, when developed, will present a great attraction to many visitors. Enjoyment and protection of private property and adequate provision for sightseers and visitors necessitates forethought as to provision of this important passive recreation facility. On September 119 1957, the Orange County Planning Commission took formal action to approve all of the foregoing recommendations of the Orange County Harbor Commission. The County Planning Commission on September 11, 1957, authorized transmittal of this report to the Newport Beach City Planning Commission together with the following additional recommendations% PIASTER STREET AND HIGHWAY PLAN 1. SANTA ANA AVENUE Santa Ana Avenue should be classified as a major street, having not less than four traffic lanes from Orange Coast Freeway to Mesa Drive. The Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways designates this route as a four lane county secondary highway. This route, as a parallel arterial to the Newport Freeway, will carry high volumes of traffic from the • Santa Ana Freeway to the Orange Coast Freeway crossing the San Diego Freeway and the Irvine Freeways: This 3 mile portion of Santa Ana Avenue is part of a 10 mile county arterial highway, 7 miles of which is designated as a primary highway with six traffic lanes (Red Hill Avenue) . • Report on Proposed Newport Beach Master Plan of 1957 Page 4 2. SUPERIOR AVENUE Superior Avenue should be classified as a major street, having not less than 6 traffic lanes from Pacific Coast Highway to the Newport Freeway. The Orange County Master Plan of Highways classifies this route as a six lane primary highway. 3. NINETEENTH STREET Nineteenth Street should be classified as a major street having not less than four traffic lanes from Newport Freeway to Irvine Avenue. This route has regional significance as it will offer an alternate route for the Pacific Coast Highway between the cities of Huntington Beach, Costa Mesa, and Newport Beach. The Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways classifies this street as a secondary highway with four traffic lanes . MASTER LAND USE PLAN • INDUSTRIAL PARK Because of conflict with potential and logical residential use it is recommended that the location of the proposed Industrial Park be placed instesd at a location northerly of the northerly slope of the San Joaquin Hills , i.e. northerly of the San Canyon Wash and easterly of MacArthur Boulevard. Respectfully submitted, ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT Harry E. Bergh, Planning Director and Secretary to the Orange County Planning Commission September 27, 1957 REVISION OF PARKS AND RECREATION SECTION OF THE MASTER PLAN AS APPROVED BY THE NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION ' December 9, 1957 III PARKS AND RECREATION A. GENERAL Newport Beach has 254 acres of publicly-owned beach land. Apart from beaches, the city has only 49 acres, mostly undeveloped, devoted to parks. In considering the park and recreational needs of the city, a clear distinction between what is feasible in the city as it is presently developed, and the needs which will arise in new areas to be added to the city in the future, should be made . We • must, therefore, consider two aspects of the problem; the current needs, which must be practical with- in the existing areas of the city, and the needs for future areas where we may plan without this re- striction. 1 . CURRENT NEEDS: a, Existing sites should be developed. b . Newport Beach has gained a ,just reputation as a pleasant and scenic seaside resort, draw- crowds from the entire area of Metropolitan Los Angeles and beyond. It has the housing and the beaches to satisfy this seasonal migration. It appears, however, that the city has overlooked or neglected the year-around needs of the people who live here . The city has also overlooked the necessity of establishing proper controls for beach usage to gain revenue therefrom, to control the type of attendance, and to prevent overcrowding. This is the more necessary since adjacent beaches for the use of inland people have a fee for entrance and more rigid controls than we have at the present time. • 1. c . A balanced recreation program should be offered to all age groups. 2. FUTURE NEEDS a. It is also apparent that the city is going to grow. The need for schools, parks and recre- ation will grow with it . Plans must be made now if this growth is not going to be haphazard and costly. b . Newport Beach has already learned the meaning of "too little and too late" in the matter of buying park sites . There is no indication that the price of land is going to come down, or that people are going to stop coming to California. c . In all new areas to be incorporated into the city, adequate park sites should be required to meet specific park and recreation standards. • B. BASIC DATA FOR DECISION 1. WHAT THE CITY HAS An excellent inventory of the present park and beach sites is found in the report on "Existing Park, Beach and Recreation Areas and Facilities in the City of Newport Beach" . This report was sub- mitted to the City Council in January 1956 by the Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission and the Citizens Committee . Rather than repeat each item in detail, this section of the Master Plan adopts this report as filed, as an essential reference. From the Land Use unit of the Master Plan we have already learned there are 49.22 acres of park land within the city, plus 254.77 acres of beaches. Together, these uses add up to 16.6 percent of the developed area of the city - about four times the recreational area found in the average city the size and character of Newport Beach. This amount of land, if there were no other factors to con- 2. • r • sider, would more than satisfy the cityts space requirements for recreation. However, there are other important factors to consider. As mentioned in the Commission Report cited above, these beaches are fully usable only during the summer months. Much of the property is under federal, state or private control. Bulk of the land is not suitable for the paved areas, playfields and buildings necessary to a complete recreation program. It is true that much of the beach land can be used to fill out the requirements for free- play areas, picnic spots and other items of the recreation program. Where possible, beach areas have been fitted into the Master Plan as parts of the neighborhood park network. In general, however, the beach areas cannot be counted on to fill all the city's recreational needs. The beaches and bays of Newport Beach must be developed to obtain their maximum desirable use with the primary objective of serving the recreational needs of the citizens of Newport Beach. The beaches should be financed and developed with this thought in mind. This report concentrates on a recreation program to serve the residents of Newport Beach, the • i� year around. 2. WHAT THE CITY SPENDS Analysis of the city's 1956-57 budget shows estimates of $81,016 for parks, $33,269 for the recreation program - a total of $114,285 . This breaks down to $5 .20 per person for costs of maintenance and operation only. Another $34,000 is shown in the general Capital Outlay fund for acquisition of new park sites. 3. These items run the per capita cost up to $6.74. Spending estimate for parks and recreation during 1955-56 is only $74,698, or approximately ~ $3.55 per capita. The large increases for the current fiscal year are explained in great part by the $20,000 item for the activity section of the recreation department - an entirely new budget item - and generally higher salaries. Capital outlay figures for 1955-56 are not found in the budget. The per capita cost for the current year appears unusually high. It must be pointed out., however, that only about one-third of the entire park and recreation expense comes from direct taxes. The city levies a direct property tax of 8¢ per $100 of assessed valuation, for park purposes. The budget estimates this tax will bring in $47,698 this year. Balance of the park • and recreation budget is filled by revenue from concessions, and the Balboa "Bay Club, and life- guard subventions from Orange County. There is no specific budget item for Site Development - a fund for improvement of existing or planned parks and recreation areas. Site acquisitions are charged against the city's general Capital Outlay Fund rather than against the Parks and Recreation budget. 3. WHAT THE CITY WILL NEED The planning area of Newport Beach, as shown on the band Use map, will hold a minimum population of 70,000. This will mean a minimum of 9,000 children of elementary school age; four intermediate schools, seventh and eighth grades, each holding 400 students; at least 14 primary schools, kinder- garten through 6th grade, each school holding 500 pupils. This estimate of the school population is important because the primary or intermediate school • 4. will be the nucleus of the neighborhood and the basic unit of the recreational system in areas to be incorporated; however, this is not applicable in the already-built-up areas of the city where recreational needs will have to be met independently. Using all the factors of projected population, natural and artificial barriers, traffic, and other facilities, the Newport Beach planning area can be divided into 20 neighborhoods. In all future areas to be added to the city, each should contain its basic school unit; each should also contain a neighborhood park, either adjacent to and a part of the school, or as a separate facility. These neighborhoods should further be combined into numerous distinct communities. Each of these should also be served by a school-recreation unit. A more limited approach to the recreation problem is necessary in existing areas of the city . • As a practical solution, recreation for these areas will have to be planned in addition to the schools. C. REQUIREMENTS The requirements in this section should be considered applicableprimarily in new areas. A well-rounded recreation program must provide facilities for these separate age groupings: pre-school children; children of elementary school age, 5 to 11 years; older children, 11 to 14 years; high school youths, 15 to 18 years; young adults, 19 to 22 years; adults, and older re- tired persons. Along with these age groupings, a comprehensive program will also provide recreation facil- ities for people in family groups. On top of what might be called these specialized facilities, the recreation program should also provide, at various times throughout the year, events that can be enjoyed by people as a • crowd, rather than as representatives of a special group. Plays, pageants, exhibitions, art 5. shows, tournaments, all fall within this latter category. But if a recreation program is to serve people, it cannot be planned on a city-wide basis. People live in neighborhoods. -The children and the adults of a neighborhood should be able to satisfy their basic recreation needs close to their homes. A group of several neighborhoods will form a community - a unit still much smaller than the entire city. Youths and adults will be willing to travel out of their neighborhood, but still within the community, to take advan- tage of recreational facilities designed for them. It takes a special type of recreational attraction - an ocean beach, a forest camp, a fishing stream - or a special event - an athletic contest, a pageant, a tournament - to lure people from all parts of the city or region. A municipal recreation program, therefore, should build upward and -outward from the neighbor- hood. This means a network of playlots for pre-school children; playgrounds for older children; playfields for teenagers; family areas for picnics and barbecues; community centers where clubs and groups can get together; neighborhood and community parks. This is the place to define these terms, and others which will be used in the following section of this report. Included in the definition will be the amount of space required so that the .particular facility can be used and enjoyed by all the people it is meant to serve. NEIGHBORHOOD: A geographic area including 1,000 - 1,500 homes; set off by natural or artifi- cial boundaries such as bays, streams, railroads, highways or major streets; served by one primary or elementary school. NEIGHBORHOOD PARK: A small recreational area, 5 to 7 acres, serving the basic recreation needs of the neighborhood; usually adjacent to the elementary school. Its facilities include a playlot 6. i for young children and shelter for their mothers; a paved area for court games; turf, sand and tanbark areas for free play; a quiet area for sunbathing or reading; family area, where 10 to 20 families can picnic or barbecue; benches and turf area for use of older persons, bowling, horseshoes, etc; parking space, and landscaping. COMMUNITY: A group of two to four neighborhoods; bounded by natural or artificial barriers; served by an intermediate school, high school or both. COMMUNITY PARKS: A recreational area of 15 to 20 acres, adjacent to the community school. In addition to the facilities contained in a typical neighborhood park, the community park will have fields for football, baseball and softball; courts for basketball, tennis and volleyball; a swimming pool; a field for other sports and special events; and a community building. • ACTIVE PLAY AREA: A recreational facility made up of the space and equipment available at an elementary or intermediate school. Designed for the 6 to 11 year age group, on ,-, to 2 acre. PLAYGROUND: Basis of an active play area, play structures and equipment. PLAYLOT: A recreation area for pre-school children, with suitable equipment, and free-play area, on one-quarter acre. Adjacent to it should be an area with benches and shelter for mothers of children using the playlot. RECREATION CENTER BUILDING: A separate structure for indoor recreation, of 10,000 to 12,000 square feet. Facilities include, but are not limited to, social halls, teen-age lounge, older persons' center, kitchen, halls, storage, display space, restrooms and office. The community park and center will usually adjoin a school. The Recreation department should arrange for joint use of school multi-purpose rooms, and facilities for arts and crafts, hobbies and study groups. 7. PARKING: Neighborhood parks require .4 to .6 acre; community parks and center, 1 to 1 .25 acres, depending on the amount of off-street parking available from the adjoining school. LANDSCAPING: From 30 to 40 percent of the total site area of a neighborhood or community park will be taken up with walkways and plantings between the various play area, and on the perimeter of the park. There is another set of standards by which a city can judge the adequacy of its entire recreation program. While attempting to meet the needs of each neighborhood and community, the city can check its total recreation inventory against the area and population of the city, using these yardsticks: PLAYLOTS: .1 acre per 1,000 people; 2000 sq. ft. minimum; 1/4 mile service radius. • PLAYGROUNDS: 1 acre per 1,000 population; 2 acre minimum; 1/2 mile service radius. PLAYBIELDS.: 1 acre per 806 people; 10 acre minimum; one mile service radius. NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS: 1 acre minimum per 1000 population; five acres minimum site; one mile service radius. RECREATION CENTER BUILDING: One per 20,000 people (in present city - one -per community area) . sWI6aNG POOL: -06e per 20,000 people. FOOTBALL FIELD: -One per 20,000 people. SOFTBALL FIELD: -One per 3,000 people BASEBALL FIELD: One per 6,000 people TENNIS COURT: One per 2,000 people BASKETBALL COURT: One per 3,000 people 8. D. THE PLAN 1 . BASIC UNITS K Examination of the Map of the Master Plan of Parks and Recreation shows that the City of Newport Beach can be broken down into numerous neighborhood units. Where these neighborhoods will surround a primary or intermediate school, the school will be counted on to provide the basic recreation facilities for those neighborhoods . Each neighborhood is also provided with a park area, containing playlot for pre-school children, mothers ' area, free play park, family area, and other facilities. In most instances, this park area is immediately adjacent to the school and forms a unit with it. _Model for this type of facility is the joint school-recreation development at 19th Street and Irvine Avenue, now the subject of detailed and precise planning by the school and recreation agencies. General statements and specifications are not necessarily applicable to existing city. In some neighborhoods, the park is separate from the school. Newport Heights neighbor- hood is an example of this division. The Newport Heights School is designated as an active play area. Park requirements will be met by development of the Cliff Drive Park. In other neighborhoods it is felt that existing and proposed improvements will satisfy the requirements of a neighborhood park, while the school fills the need for an active play area. x The new neighborhoods have, in turn, been grouped around community parks and centers. It will be noted that the community park also serves as the neighborhood park for the neighborhood in which it is situated. 9. The plan calls for community parks and separate community recreation buildings at the four intermediate schools to be set up in the annexed areas of the city. The map on page 32 and the data on the chart shown on Page 33, providing a summary of the Master Plan of Parks and Recreation, shall be applicable to all areas as indicated on the revised map and table No. Precise plans for each of the park and recreation areas should be guided by the Master Plan on Page 32 and the chart, Page 33• High on the priority list for site plans are: Corona del Mar, main beach; Balboa Peninsula, ocean front from Alvarado Street to "B" Street; school"park site, 19th Street and Irvine Avenue; Cliff Drive Park and Channel Place Park. 10. 4! • Summary of Recommendations PARK AND RECREATION PLAN Newport Beach, Calif. December,1957 r l� • • - I • - •"" - SPECI-AL COMMUNITY -FACILITIES NEI4H8CftH0OD BEACH FS{ 1+ACILI'PI$S- - I LEGEND m O = Proposed a X = Existing ,�i �i .mot m n - s01, is at at .i 0 .v o ar .y 0 C +1 < a{ W i W ;i -i 0, rr, rX, CO -0 0) - - AC m m X CO +f 421,f x. a - 0 • A H -1 H a o 0 ri 43 m -4 o ba a. .-I a w. o �f id ;4 m .N Od 03 0 f4 a o . Fa - ¢ n � �x4) ++ +> 0) m �m >, A£ �m •P x P9 m I a00oall w0u E W �0 00 U III. + f3 W . s COMMUNITY Community Park and Center WACILITIES Newport high .School O 0 ; x x x x x x x x x 0 0 0 x 0 1 th St, & Irvine Ave. Center Building 0 0 X 1 th• St_ & Balboa, Blvd. MIGHBORHOOD Neighborhood Park . . . A-1 Horace Ensign School x x x x x O x O '0 0 x 0 Cliff Dr o & -Irvine- Ave. KEIGHBCRHOOD _Neighborhood Park - 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 A-2 Cliff Dr, & Beacon Dr. t Playground IVINewport Heights School _ x x x x x -- - l th & Santa Ana Blvd IGiiBO$Ii4dD Nejghborkiood Park _ 0 0 0 0 O 0 '0 4 ` A-3 Channel Place Playground Jest Newport Park 0 x 0 x . - x _37th St. & Balboa Blvd, Playground_ . - Proposed Elem.School 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vir inia St. - SN=EFMHOOD Neighborhood Park at A-4 Beach Park - 0 x x x X x X Main St. & Ocean Front Playground O 0 0 Balboa Peninsula j Playground Newport Elementary Schoo x- x x 3� Lido isle 'Bridge Park .- COMMUNITY FACILITIES NEIGHBORHOOD FACILITIES LEGEND O = Proposed ao ¢ m s A = Existing � H m a H ri H m o k m a o°O " 'a41i 9mi . o' *1a. w fm+o "� w c�\ w m v m as m" ai ri ai " 6 -m me0 ti o o .14 u qi ri tpa ri r-1 ri P4. O m A O w a ,�i Cd U � ' � a E f�A W e� W o , w W Pam, 0 �a m o, COMMUNITY ' Communiay' Park & Centey. FACILITIES Intermediate School 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21st St. & Tustin Ave . NEIGHBORHOOD Neighborhood. Park also r B-1 at Intermediate School 0 00 0 0 ... 0 0 0 0- 0 " O 21st St. & Tustin Ave . layground 0 0 O O Proposed Elem. School 0 • Shipway Lane NEIGHBORHOOp Neighborhood Park >4 B-2 Elementary School 0 0_ 0 '0 -O 0 0 0 0 0 O ' x �+ 1 th St & IrvineA NEIGHBORHOOD Neighborhood.Park B-3 Elementary School IN COST ME'A 18th St. v NEIGHBORHOOD Neighborhood Park $-4 Elementary School IN COST COSTJ ME A 21st St. & -Santa- Ana NEIGHBORHOOD Neighborhood Park - B-5 Element School IN C• ST ME A 2 r t Airp NEIGHBORHOOD Neighborhood Park B—b Elementary `School IN 0 AN E C UN Y S ST M Del, Mar Ave. & Santa - Ana. COMMUNITY FACILITIES NEIGHBORHOOD FACILITIES LEGEND Cd Cd 0 = Proposed X = Existing by ,�-� a ¢ m ri m r�i r�i m o r0� ix+ id cd trl 0 P rrq N N 0 N W 5, rzi° Z w P. m m w ¢a H cd :>4 �+ 'd o H ri E am 4-� N ri rI bO 0 H O w ri r•1 r-i 0 P4 0 w w — P 0 ri -P r. P, z ri N P H. H H (2+ 0 0 H -N 02 d 0 bD z cd o ,i m ri m 4� w w w � P a, 0 P x z Sa 4-N N 4i rl N R A A P ri by 10 ri 0 -N -H wrl 0) N 4-3 N -HJa N d) 5a ! 0) U� U ca d ca o a E+ PQ I W ca W O r44 a a r� w : a w COMMUNITY Community Park & Center FACILITIES Intermediate School 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Orchard Drive PQ NEIGHBORHOOD Neighborhood Park also C-1 at Intermediate Schl . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O Orchard Drive • Ems, Playground 2 Elementary School 0 0 0 0 0 Acacia & Orchard oU NEIGHBORHOOD Neighborhood Park C-2 Elementary School 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 MacArthur Blvd. COMMUNITY Community Park & FACILITIES Center Building 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Intermediate School Jamboree Road NEIGHBORHOOD Neighborhood Park also A D-1 at Intermediate Schl. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 Jamboree Road Playground w Elem.School near 0 0 0, 0 U Y Ardine Blvd. H NEIGHBORHOOD Neighborhood Park 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D-2 Elementary School Upper Bay C-) NEIGHBORHOOD Neighborhood Park 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 s • D-3 Elementary. -School Jamboree Road COMMUNITY FACILITIES NEIGHBORHOOD FACILITIES LEGEND 0 = Proposed X = Existing '0 0 d [3 ci d N .x Ft rl rl @ rl rl rl rl @ U F+ S+ (d 11 0 0 f�� W +1 _H � O 6 a U fi -N N +i ,i bO H U 0 H H H N Pr 'td cd — ;4 O ,i +> O 5. z •ri 0 .Q H H r1 P4 O Cs rt 4-� m d O bD W �$. O ,1 m ,i m 4-� cd cd cd fti Pa O F. M 0 Fq 0 N U •� 3 H N ��Udd ccmdd O O H 0 H 0 P H O N w U EQ M 0 Pa P W LA w P4 0 r74 N P4 W Pa � � (� Pa COMMUNITY Community Center - FACILITIES Proposed High School 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 MacArthur Bldg. Community Park Proposed Inter- mediate School 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 = East of Marguerite w Ave . Ext. NEIGHBORHOOD Neighborhood Park HE-1 Proposed Elem.School 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 East of High School NEIGHBORHOOD Neighborhood 'Park o E-2 Proposed Elem.School U West of Marguerite 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ave . Ext . NEIGHBORHOOD Neighborhood Park E-3 Also at the Proposed Intermediate School 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 East of Marguerite -Ext . a i COMMUNITY FACILITIES NEIGHBORHOOD FACILITIE BEACH FACILITIE LEGEND Cd 0 a`di 0 = Proposed ¢ ¢ vi ai x X = Existing 10 H m -H H H ,i m m P SL, W W O f�, W -H -H +ii 0 0 Q w a) a4 a w W w m o zs a> ¢ Cd tox m o 7. ,i 8 co x � rim E P,a)-N ,i so o W ri ri H m w :3 cd Cd - P o 0 z F, ,i 4' -H A 9 ,i m ,n � ri H P+ o c7 H +-D m a o bo a ,-i ,d 0 C' o , i m ,-i m N. cd m A u cl a o t, A _P I cd w ,i m .n A A P H FA 10 rq (D 43 Cd H ,-i ?b 0 44 0 .N 4� a) ,H 0 is .0. a) -N `4 o m 3 W �andd c-, o 10E W > W a3 4� -H m F, U U Eli Rl Pq 03 c°=t 0 L w a, W 0.i a W a) W COMMUNITY Community Park & FACILITIES Center Harbor View Elem School-Iris Ave, 0 x 0 0 0 0 0 x O x 0 0 x 0 • Beach Park Corona del Mar Beach-Iris Ave. 0 x 0 0 x x x x NEIGHBORHOOD Neighborhood Park O F-1 also Harbor View x x 0 0 0 0 x 0 Elem.School. NEIGHBORHOOD Neighborhood Park F-2 Bayside Drive Park 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Playground Corona del Mar a Elem.School 3rd Ave. and x x x x x x Carnation NEIGHBORHOOD Neighborhood Par F-3 Irvine Terrace 0 0 0 ,10 0 NEIGHBORHOOD Playground -F-3 Park Avenue and 0 0 Collins Street EXHIBIT"E" f C CITY OF COSTA MESA 0 P September 12, 1957 Y Mr. Walter Longmoor, Chairman Newport Beach Planning Commission Newport Beach, California Dear Sir: The Costa Mesa Planning Commission has studied your Master Plan of proposed land use and wishes to compliment you and your consultant on a very fine job of preparation of your long range, comprehensive plan of land use. f We have studied all the area which borders the City of Costa Mesa and are in accord with your designation of all the zones common to Costa Mesa except for the proposed Industrial Park Development as shown on the southwest portion of Page 11 of your Master Plan. As a large portion of' this area is in litigation, we do not feel that we can, at this time, express an opinion as to the future zoning of this area. I trust that this report will, in some way, serve as a help in your future decision of city development. Very truly yours, George Tobias, Chairman Costa Mesa Planning Commission WLD:am f EXHIBIT "F" 40 C C 0 0 P P Y Y NMIPORT HARBOR UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT August 9, 1957 PLANNING COMMISSION City of Newport Beach Newport Beach, California Attention: W.M. Longmoor, Chairman Gentlemen: I have appreciated having a copy of the proposed "Master Plan" for Newport Beach for perusal. Although I am • inexperienced in these matters it seems to me that the plan is an excellent one and I am unable to offer suggestions for modification. Sincerely, /s/ Sidney H. Davidson SIDNEY H. DAVIDSON District Superintendent SHD/fc • 1 EXHIBIT uGU C C 0 0 P P to Y Y NVdPORT BEACH ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2000 Cliff Drive P.O. Box 368 Newport Beach, Calif. June 5, 1957 Mr. Gerry Drawdy Administrative Assistant Newport Beach Planning Commission City Hall Newport Beach, California Dear Mr. Drawdys Recently, local newspapers have carried maps of a proposed Master Plan prepared for the City of Newport Beach by Hahn, Wise and Associates. Among other things, these plans show a number of proposed school sites for future development. The Newport Beach Elementary School Board at its June 4th meeting discussed these plans at some length and have instructed me to relay to you its reaction to them. The Board is opposed to the inclusion in the plan of certain proposed school sites , particularly the proposed sites on Balboa Island and on the Balboa Peninsula. We do not believe that these sites would fit into a sound and forward looking program for school development, and the publication of such proposals, without consideration of the Boards ' s plans has a detrimental effect on public understanding of the probable future development of the School District. The Board wishes to request that in the future development of a Master Plan for the City of Newport Beach, matters pertaining to the location of future schools be brought to its attention or to the attention of the District Superintendent before reaching the stage where such plans are submitted for publication. Sincerely yours, NEWPORT BEACH &;EAMENTARY SCI-'_OOLS /s/ Roy 0. Andersen • ROY 0 . ANDERSEN District Superintendent ROA;mcb EXHIBIT 1IG" • C C 0 0 p P Y Y August 8, 1957 Newport Beach Elem. School District 1400 Cliff Drive Newport Beach, California Attention : Mr. Roy Andersen, Supt, Dear Mr. Andersen: Mr. Jerry Drawdy and the writer visited you the latter part of June. We filed with you a copy of the Master Plan for Newport Beach, and disco ssed with you some of its phases affecting your school district. The Planning Commission desires to consider any suggestions you desire to submit for changes, deletions or additions • to the Master Plan. It would be appreciated if you would advise the Commission as soon as possible whether or not you desire to submit any recommendations for changes . If you do, please advise when your recom endations will be submitted to the Commission. The Commission is now up to the point of working out the time schedule of preparing its report on the Master Plan for submission to the City Council. If you desire a conference, the writer and Mr. Drawdy would be happy to meet with you at your convenience. Thank you for any suggestions you desire to submit. Sincerely yours, PLANNING COMiISSION /s/ Walter Longmoor W.M. Longmoor Chairman «. EXHIBIT "Gil C C 0 0 P P Y Y NUVIPORT BEACH ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2000 Cliff Drive P.O. Box 368 Newport Beach, Calif. August 16, 1957 Mr. W.M. Longmoor, Chairman Planning Commission City of Newport Beach Newport Beach, California Dear Mr. Longmoor: I have received your letter of August 8, and will bring it to the attention of the School Board at its next regular meeting of September 3rd. Since you and Mr. Drawdy left the copy of the Master Plan in my office last Tune, members of the Board have been studying it and there has been some general discussion but no definite action regarding recommendations for changes. From the general discussions of the Board, I am not at-all sure that any specific recommendations will be forthcoming. It is my impression, however, that the members of the Board feel that detailed plans concerning future school locations, etc . should not be a part of the City' s blaster Plan. This is a matter that the School Board will have to give a great deal of consideration to in the years ahead, but is not now in a position to outline in detail. I recognize that schools were brought into the Master Plan largely in connection with the development of recreational areas. The Newport Beach Elementary School District has taken a lead in past years in bringing about the present use of school facilities by the recreation department. I feel certain that the School Board will want to continue this practice. It is not logical however, to assume that recreational needs will be the principle factor in determining the future development of our School District plans. The School Board' s first reaction to the Master Plan was that no detailed outline of future school development should . Page 2 August 16, 1957 Mr. W.M. Longmoor, Chairman Planning Commission City of Newport Beach be made and published in connection with the City' s Master Plans, unless the School Board has first been consulted and has had an opportunity to contribute to that plan. Following the September Board Meeting, I will again write to you to let you know if there are any additional suggestions from the School Board. Sincerely yoursx NEGJPORT BEACH ELEMENTERY SCHOOLS /s/ Roy 0. Andersen . ROY 0. ANDERSEN District Superintendent ROA:fw • EXHIBIT "Gil C 0 P Y August 30, 1957 Newport Beach Elementary School District 2000 Cliff Drive P.O. Box 368 Newport Beach, California Attention: Mr. Roy 0. Andersen District Superintendent Dear Mr. Andersen: We are in receipt of your letter of the 16th. We appreciate the points which you point out in your letter. It is not the purpose or intent of the Planning Commission to even try to tell you where and when to locate schools. That function is entirely within the jur- isdiction of the officials of your school district. The only reason. schools entered the scope of the preparation of the Master Plan are as follows: 1. The State law (Conservation and Planning Act, Chapter 3 of Title 7) and the City Charter of Newport Beach prescribes that the Planning Commission shall prepare a Master Plan and submit it to the City Council. • 2. Section 65475 of the State law mentioned above prescribes that during the formulation of a Master Plan, the Planning Commission shall inform, confer and cooperate with School Boards to the end that maximum coordination of plans may be secured,-etc. The Planning Commission is now trying to formulate such a Master Plan and to carry out the requirements of the law is our only reason for soliciting -your desires. Any indication of a possible location of a school on the Master Plan does not mean that you are bound by law to locate the school at that point at any time in the future. Any such indication for the location of a school is only for your protection in the future. It puts all people concerned in developing property on notice that the School Board may desire to locate a school in the general area and has the right to do so. It may place your District in a more favorable position to negotiate for the purchase of land needed. Any association of locations for future schools and recreational areas should not be precisely determined at this time. These matters should be decided when your school district selects new school sites. It you and the School Board desire that any reference to new school sites be left out of our Master Plan, please advise us and we shall be happy to abide by your wishes. In any event, please do not feel that we are trying to invade your field of jurisdiction. We shall await advices as to your wishes and shall attempt to carry them out. Sincerely yours, W. M. Longmoor Chairman EXHIBIT. "G" C C ° ° P P Y Y NEWPORT BEACH ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2000 Cliff Drive P.O. Box 368 Newport Beach, Calif. 9/6/1957 Mr. W.M. Longmoor, Chairman Planning Commission, City of Newport Beach Newport Beach, California Dear Mr. Longmoor: Your letters of August 8th and August 30th, 1957 were consider..;iby the Newport Beach Elementary School Board at its regular meeting of September 3rd. The Board appreciated your presentation of the position of the Planning Commission in regard to the location of new school sites and your desire to work with the School Board in planning for those sites. • After a careful study of the proposed Master Plan submitted by Hahn, Wise and Associates , dated January 19579 the Board unanimously adopted a motion going on record as favoring the - elimination of schools proposed for the presently developed areas of the District; specifically, the proposed site on Balboa Island, designated P-49 and the one on the Balboa Peninsula, designated A -3 , and to tentatively approve sites proposed for the presently undeveloped areas that fall within the boundaries of the Newport Beach Elementary School District, as set forth in the Master Plan dated January, 1957• We will appreciate being kept informed of the future develop- ment of the Master Plan as it pertains to the School District, and hope that you will call on us if we can be of assistance. Sincerely yours, NEGJPORT BDhCH ELDMENTARY SCHOOLS /s/ Roy 0. Andersen ROY 0 . ANDERSEN District Superintendent ROA:mch • =IBIT 1 H11 • MINUTES, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA July 18, 1957 8:00 PM Roll Call Commissioners Present Longmoor, Lind, Briggs, Rudd, Hayton, Copelin, Reed & Keene Commissioners Absent Smith On motion of Commissioner Copelin, seconded by Comm. Reed, the minutes of the Regular Meeting on June 209 1957, and Adjourned Meeting on June 279 1957, were approved by the follow- ing roll call vote, to wit: ALL AYES. The Chairman announced that all hearings and other matters would be considered by the Commission at an Adjourned Meeting on July 259 1957, with the exception of the following: Amendment #40 • 1. Second hearing on Resolution of Intention No. 612 to delete Sub-section D of Section 9103 .627 and Sub-section D of Section 9103.729 Ordinance No. 635, which reads: "Storage of inflammable liquids, subject to the applicant for the Use Permit first securing a Certificate of Approval from the City Fire Department." 2. Commissioner Lind moved the Commission recommend to the City Council thqt Sub-section D of Section 9103.62 and Sub-section D of Section 9103.72 be deleted from Ordinance 635 so that the Zoning Ordinance would coincide with the Fire Prevention Code, seconded by Commissioner Rudd and carried by the following roll call vote, to wit: ALL AYES. Amendment #41 1. First hearing on Resolution of Intention No. 614 to hold public hearings on certain changes to the Subdivision Ordinance. 2. On motion of Commissioner Keene, seconded by Commissioner Rudd, Amendment +41 was set over until . the next regular meeting. Page 2 Chairman Longmoor then explained we are preparing a New Plaster Plan for presentation to the City Council. According to State Law Article 79 Section 64560, all City Planning Commissions must prepare a proper Master Plan to be presented to the City Council. Mr. Longmoor quoted as follows from the City Planner' s letter of May 23, 1957: "The Plan is the result of a year-long study of the conditions which now exist in the City: the problems which arise from those conditions ; and possible, practical solutions to those problems . While dealing with the present, the Plan has also been vitally concerned with the future, when Newport Beach will be a city of three times its present size and population. This city of the future has been the guide in all the studies, and the goal in all the planning which resulted. Some of the program can be started immediately. Others may be carried over a long period, after careful and detailed study by the officials and citizens of the City. • Certain elements of these plans may clash with trad- itions, personal interests, attitudes and habits of long standing. The first consideration, however, must be the welfare of the community, now and in the decades to come." He also quoted the following: "Newport Beach is feeling the impact of this drive, inherent in the nature of cities, to grow. The population has more than doubled in the last ten years. The city has the potential within the next forty years to hold a population of 70,000 and to expand its present area two and a half times . The prospect of this growth makes the necessity for a Master Plan inescapable. " Mr. Longmoor stated the Commission would hold the hearings on the three phases as set forth in the Master Plan. LAND USE PLAN PIUSE Mr. Kramer, 1403 North Bay Front, Balboa Island "What happened to the Master Plan made up around the year of 1948?" I Page 3 Mr. Longmoor- "Planning Commission adopted this plan but the City Council only adopted the Zoning and Sub-Division Ordinances . The rest of the Plan was not adopted." Mr. Kramer:- "Was any of the 1948 Plan used in this new Master Plan? Does this plan differ from the 1948 Plan? Wonders if the City is going to spend money with Hahn, ?--fise and Association every ten years for Master Plans?" Mr. Longmoor: "Very few changes in Land Use Plan. The Zoning Ordinance will be changed later to meet conditions as they exist today. Other phases of former Master Plan are materially changed." Mr. R. P. Pe-gran, 16011 Seashore Drive "I note on proposed plan that the Ocean Front Property in West Newport is proposed as R-1. Believes this is not an ideal zoning for this property. Have resided in this territory for nine years , and have noted that 9016 of the improvements have been R-2 improvements . The majority of new structures are R-2. Feels this Commission should consider what they now have in the area. Change • of zoning to R-1 would require each owner on all problems in connection with building changes , etc. , to get a special permit to do so'.. Present zoning does not require this . There is a considerable amount of improvement going on in this area and therefore, does not think that an R-1 zoning should be given to this property. Feels that change of zoning would work a hardship on the resi- dents ." Commissioners stated their would study this problem. Section referred to is in West Newport along the Ocean Front. Mrs. Burton, Ocean Blvd. , Corona del Mar "Am concerned about- the proposed change to R-2 instead of the present R-1. Feels this section should be kept R-1 as she feels this is the best use for the property in this area, Speaks not only for herself but for others in the neighborhood. Also wish to mention the plan of widening Ocean Blvd. to a four-lane road. Wonders whether it will go into the City Park or into privately-owned property. Residents will resent anything taken from the City Park side." • Page �+ • Mr. Barber: "Regarding the four-lane road, nothing has been decided as to how this road will be built and where the additional land will be taken from. There is a goodly number of duplexes in this area. If possible, this area will be resurveyed and Commission could change it back to its original zoning if the residents are opposed to this R-2 zoning proposal. " Mr. Longmoor: "It is the intention of the Commission and the Consultants to upgrade this section if possible and not to downgrade it." Mrs . Emory Moore, Ocean Blvd. , Balboa "It is my understanding that from "D" Street to "G" Street is zoned for nultiple dwellings . It is the trend in this area to change from multiple dwellings to single family dwellings . From "D" Street down to the pier, the trend 'here is to multiple dwellings . Feels that a zoning of this type would downgrade a typical residential type area." Mr. Barber: "The area from "G" to "D" Street has been given the R- 3 zoning . " Mrs . Moore: "The R-3 dwelling that exist now should be left but I fee' that the zoning should be changed to R-1. There are that units around "F" Street but other than that there is not many others ." Mr. Longmoor: "Think it might be a good idea to have a resurvey of these blocks so that we might give them the proper zoriing. " Mr. Barber: "We are looking forward to the future development of this area . " Mrs. Burton: "Feels that if the R-1 and R-3 zoning is not straightened out before the Master Plan is approved, protection for these districts is lost .even if there is not a definite reed for these regulations now. Would like protection to stay until it is necessary to change." Mrs . Rea, 348 POPPY; Corona del Mar "Feels the same about zoning and do not want the area downgraded. Feels narrow streets could not stand more • parking if the district were changed to R-3 ." Page 5 • Mr. Longmoor: "The purpose of this Commission is to upgrade property and not to downgrade it. In the section from McFadden Place along Balboa Blvd. to Balboa, we tried to keep that R-1 but the residents insisted that it be zoned R-3 , The Commission has tried to keep down density of population where possible." ' ' Mr. Kramer- "What about the new commercial zoning for Marine and Onyx AvLnua. • There isn' t enough parking now for the business on the island now. Feels it would be better to move the business off the Island. By putting more on the Island we are going to have more congestion. Balboa Island should be kept strictly as a residential area." Mr. Barber- "Commercial area will not be changed too much in the area of Marine Avenue. The property on Onyx Ave. is being proposed for a professional building zoning. The list for C-1 district will remain as it is in its present form. " Mr. Kramer: "I feel that the number of commercial uses for business should be cut on Balboa Island. People create . a great parking problem on Marine now. There are apart- ments above some of the shops and there are no parking facilities for them. Professional buildings are considered C-1 zoning. It is my feeling that Balboa Island should be zoned R•-1." Mr . Longmoor: "Would it be possible for the business people on Balboa Island to submit a proposal listing the types of commercial uses they would like on the Island. we could then decide if they would care to set up a special Commercial Zone . " Mrs . Kate McCann, Balboa Island "It is my feeling that Deonle who have their business started on Balboa Island should be allowed to remain there. " Mr. Longmoor: "If the people on Balboa Island wish a highly restricted zone, they should submit a tentative plan for this . " "Do you people favor the idea of having eventually another bridge to the Island for safety reasons?" Mrs. McCann- "irle do not want to attract any more visitors to the Island as there is not enough room for the present at . the present time. I think things should be left the way they are. " Mr. Kramer: "Vonders what the bridge would gain or what the purpose of it would be. " Page 6 Mr. Longmoor: "It would be possible for the residents of Balboa Island to leave the Island much faster in case of any emergency. Second bridge could also be used for easier circulation' of traffic and also as a safety factor. " Mr. Kramer: It is my feeling that the bridge should be placed at the other end of the Island and not have them both together. It would be a better idea to restrict parking on Marine Ave. " Mr. Longmoor: "Previous Master Plan proposed a second bridge at the other end of the Island. At the present time, it would not be possible due to the expensive buildings constructed in the path of the previously proposed site, and the present site would be more economical." Mr. Kramer: "I feel that two bridges together would make a bottle neck." ' Mr. Barber: "Traffic on Iviarine Ave. is 12,000 cars a day. If there were two bridges it would split up the traffic." • Mr. Kramer: "If the bridge was put at the other end of the Islandq it would spread the traffic out. What is the cost of this bridge going to be?" Mr. Barber: "It is impossible to estimate a cost at this time as this bridge might not be constructed for a number of years ." Mrs . Burton: "I note that Bayside Drive is being considered as one of the major roads leading from Corona del Mar. This would mean a four-lane road. Has the cost been considered?" Mr. Barber: "Some of these changes would not take place for another 20 years . , It is impossible to figure costs at that time. The Master Plan is a goal the City should be planning toward. It would be useless task to figure these costs at this time." Mrs . Burton: "Have you considered the houses that have been built on Bayside Drive? I wonder if serious thought has been given tO the tremendous cost in widening Bayside Drive. " Mr. Longmoor: "The Irvine Company has dedicated approximately • 20 feet along Bayside Drive from Marine Ave. as far as the eastern boundary of their property. It may be necessary to go to considerable expense to widen this road from the Irvine boundary line to intersection of Carnation and Bayside. Page 7 Mrs . Burton: "It is my understanding that the Freeway will go around Merle's Drive-In and leave the present road in Corona del Mar as a secondary road. Feels that this secondary road would be adequate as a main road for Corona del Mar. " Mr. Longmoor: "The high level bridge will be the deciding factor. " Mrs. Burton: "I feel Bayside Drive is too cut up to be used as a major road and the structure of the land, as it is now, would be too difficult to construct a road of this nature. Had the Commission considered Park Uses for this area?" Mr. Barber explained this plan to her. Mrs . Burton: "It is my feeling there should be a' little more parking and a little less highway. " Mrs . Moore: "I do not understand the zoning of Commercial for the Lido Penninsula. It is my understanding that this area would eventually be residential instead of the trailer park. Scattered R-2 zoning would reduce density of population." • Mr. Longmoor: "In some areas, of Corona del Mar we tried to change R-2 zoning to R-1 but the property owners forced us to retain existing R-2 in 1950. Hans Lorenz: "Is it the intention of the Commission not to permit additional R-2 to appear in the Master Plan in the future but to let existing ordinances stand as they are?" Mr. Roy Maypole, Balboa Island "Is the philosphy of the Master Plan to bring more people to Island or are we trying to upgrade the area and what is the best method of doing this?" Mr. Longmoor: "We have to consider what has happened in population increases in the last ten years , Problem is to meet the anticipated population problems in the future and resulting problems ." Mrs . Rae: "Feels that Poppy Ave. is a so-called peninsula. The R-1 conversion should take place by block units ." Mr. Maypole: "Feels that R-2 units on Balboa Island as they ftre destroyed should be rebuilt as R-1 units . Cars at the present time are too large to get into garage space • provided for cars of 20 years ago." Page 8 • Mr. C . C . Palmer, 1138 28th Street, Newport Beach "Have interests in Balboa Island and feel that more parking zones should be created. " Mr. Kramer : "This would bring more congestion to Balboa Island and it is a costly idea. The North Bay has more con- gestion in it now. Feels there are too many people coming to Balboa Island. It would be better to put the people in the Back Bay. They could be spread out in the Back Bay where there is plenty of room." Mr. Palmer: "Am asking about the 32nd Street and McFadden Place to Ocean Front. Have read about changes in this area and wonder what stand the Commission is going to take on them. I think this section should not be put in multiple dwelling category." Mr. Barber: "This will not take place until sometime in the future. It is not a definite plan, it is only a recommen- dation." Mr. Lorenz: "It is my feeling that the Master Plan was drawn with the thought that there was no houses in this area at all." STREET AND HIGHWAYS PHASE Mr. Pegram: "I note that the plan provides fora new ingress to Newport from Coast Highway via 60th Street which parallels the P.E. right of way. Is it definite that the P.E. will move to 53rd Street and what are the proposed plans for the P.E.Y" Mr. Webb: "It is our hope that we can get the P.E. to move their facilities to 58th Street or even to go beyond 58th if possible. " Mr . Palmer: "Is it the plan to extend street from the Old City Hall site to 26th Street and down the Ocean Front. I wonder if this is a good plan. " Mr. Barber: "Explained in detail the form of ingress and egress planned for Old Newport." Mr. Palmer: "It is very impractical to route traffic on 24th and 26th as these streets are too narrow." . Mrs . Moore: "I think it would be well to consider the final recommendation of the Citizen's Advisory Committee before too much consideration is given to proposed road on the Ocean Front. This recommendation does not consider any Ocean Front at all. We feel this road would invite com- mercial ventures on the Ocean Front. " Page 9 • Mr. Copelin: "It is my idea that 32nd Street be widened to Balboa Blvd. up to McFadden and cross over the Old City Hall property on Ocean Front to 15th Street and across to 15th Street. I feel this is the only plan:" Mr. Maypole: "The crux of the thing is the location of the Freeway. Wonder if anybody has had anything definite on the location of the Freeway." Mr. Longmoor: "State Highway Department is making a survey, but no one knows how soon the survey will be completed." Mr. Maypole: "I wonder if the State Highway could give general idea where Freeway will be constructed so that definite plans could be made." Mr. Longmoor: "I think it would be well to wait until survey has been made. " PARKS AND RECREATION PHASE Mr . Longmoor: "The PB & R has not had time to make any definite • recommendations for this phase and their recommendations will be given at the August hearing." Mr. Longmoor: "Do the people ' in Balboa Island want playground and recreation facilities oii the Island. I could not vote a playground across Bayside Drive. It would be dangerous to the Children crossing the bridge and Bayside Driveg and the City of Newport Beach would have to carry tremendous amount of liability insurance for this purpose .t' Mr . Maypole: "I moved to Balboa Island because it is a natural playground. It is my feeling there is not money to purchase expensive lots for playground purposes ." Mr. Kramer: "People do not come to Balboa Island for play- ground facilities . It is my feeling that the filling in of the Grand Canal will promote a parking lot for the business area. The Planning Commission has allowed buildings to go up without providing parking facilities. " Mr. Maypole: "All my dealings with the business people has been pleasant. I have found them most cooperative. " Mr. Kramer: "Why are apartments allowed above stores and no parking is provided?" �J J Page 10 • Mr. Briggs: "I have been interested in planning matters both on the County and the City for the past 18 years . The people on Balboa Island have not been very cooperative in helping to develop Balboa Island in a proper manner. The lots have been small, 30-foot, and each owner was thinking of himself. There are 1,400 lots on the Island with a concentration of 80 people to the acre." Mrs . Latin, Balboa Island "Why can' t parking meters be put in? I signed a petition for the playground to go in opposite the Villa Marina." Mr. Longmoor: "I would not be a party to permitting a play- ground for children opposite the Villa Marina as it is very dangerous ." Mrs. Beverly Crawford, Balboa Island "Balboa Island is in no need of a playground for its children. My children do not feel the need of one when we are here. " Mrs . Moore: "The need for a playground is in the winter time. • The children do not have the space to play ball. ' This is all explained in the recommendation of the Citizen' s Advisory Committee. " Mr. Longmoor: "The Commission will await with interest the suggestions contained in this recommendation." Mr. Kramer: "I refer to Mr. Briggs' remarks about Balboa Island. I tried at one time to get the City to acquire property for a playground but no one was interested." Mrs . Crawford: "Wonders if Master Plan calls for the filling in of the Grand Canal. Wonders if people would have ahything to say about this. " Mr. Longmoor: "The people will decide it." Mr. Maypole. "Wondered how the City operated with regard to other waterfront property." Mr . Penny: "I would not like to give any opinion at this time ." Mr. Kramer: (Addressing the following remarks to Mr . Barber) "I wonder if you owned property on the Grand Canal, would . you be in favor of filling in the Canal? I don' t feel there is any use for a recreation facility on the Island at the present time." f A . Page 11 • Mr. Barber: "This park would take care of the pre-school children. The filling in of the Grand Canal might be a possible solution for this problem." Mr. Kramer: "It is my feeling that my property has been down- graded by bringing in too much business to the Island." ELECTION OF OFFICNRS Commissioner Briggs nominated Comm. Longmovr as Chairman. Comm. Briggs nominated Comm. Copelin as Secretary. Comm. Keene nominated Comm. Lind for the office of Vice Chairman. The Commission acting as a whole, unanimously endorsed all nominations , and the offices of Chairman Vice Chairmang and Secretary were declared filled. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • Business at hand being declared completed9 the Commission meeting was adjourned on motion of Comm. K_eene9 seconded by Comm. Hayton and carried. Ray Y. Copelin Secretary EXHIBIT uHn MINUTES, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS NDIPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA August 15, 1957 8:00 PM SECOND HEARING ON MASTER PLAN Roll Call Commissioners Present: Longmoor, Briggs, Rudd, Hayton, Copelin, Reed & Keene Commissioners Absent : Lind Commissioner Longmoor explained the purpose of a Master Plan is to cover anticipated changes in a community for a period of approximately twenty (20) years, and that it is a guide which must be revised each year. He then went into a lengthy explanation concerning the three phases of the Master Plan, possible annexations to the City of Newport Beach, possible residential expansion in the Upper Bay Area, probable devel- opment of a large shopping center in the vicinity of the Irvine Country Club. Commissioner Longmoor then asked if anyone wished to discuss any phase of the proposed Master Plan. The following people spoke against the filling in of the Grand Canal: Maud Sibley, 110 Grand Canal Mr. Truman W. Lattin, 220-222 Grand Canal Mrs . Charles Gould, 116 Grand Canal Mr. G. S. Holland, 333 Grand Canal Mr. Walter Smith 125 Grand Canal Marion Colbert,9 Grand Can_al Mr. Walter Talbot, 212 Grand Canal Mr. Hartley Smith, 3312 Ocean Blvd. , CDM After a long discussion regarding the Grand Canal, Commissioner Longmoor asked the Commissioners if they wished to express an unofficial opinion regarding this matter. The opinions of the Commissioners were as follows: Rudd - Opposed to filling in canal Hayton - " u it n u Copelin " " " " 11 Smith " " it " 11 Reed - Appreciates views of protestants but does not wish to express an opinion at this time . �'• Keene - Sympathizes with residents on Balboa Island but does not feel he should express an opinion at this time. Page 2 . Arthur'Kramer, 1403 North Bay Front, Balboa Island "Why, when this City was created and this Commission formed, you agreed to certain zoning and these zones should have been kept. This Commission should not have taken upon itself to rezone an area after it has been established a certain zone. The original zoning given to an area should be kept and if people want to create new zones, they should go into new areas which have not been developed. Feel that Commissioners should stick to the original zoning laws in the Island and not grant these variances ." Mr. Longmoor: "We are seeking and doing our best to hold the zoning lines as contained in the 1943 and 1950 Master Plans . I am against any changes in zoning on Balboa Island." Ben Reddick: "I think Mr. Kramer is acting in bad taste. The nine members of this Commission serve without pay who interpret, transmit, guide, and expedite the function of the law as established by the City Council of Newport Beach. The Commission does not own land, it does not ask for any variances and does not change the zoning. It is the people themselves who do this and the Com- mission tries its very best to help them. I think it is very unfair to take nine men to task who are doing their best." . . Mr. Brennerman, 3312 Ocean Blvd. , Corona del Mar "I am interested in the rezoning of Corona del Mar. Understand the bluff side of Ocean Blvd. is going to be rezoned R-1 and the other side of the street R-2. Wonder if zoning is going to be changed." Mr. Longmoor: "We do not believe there will be any change in zoning in the Corona del Mar area," Mr. Brennerman: "Recently they have put new signs regarding 20 minutes parking and no parking signs on Ocean Blvd. The people who cannot get to the beach at Corona del Mar or who do not wish to pay the 500 charge are parking and obstructing the view. tlonder if anything could be done with regard to this ." Mr. Longmoor: "This is not under our jurisdiction and is under the jurisdiction of the Department of Public Works .,' Mr. Brennerman: "There is no time limit on trucks parking in • parking zones . Can something be done about this?" Mr. Longmoor: "This is not under our jurisdiction, but is in the hands of the City Administration. This should be sent to City Council." Y Page 3 • Mr. Penny: "He should be referred to the City Manager for the solution of these problems . " Mr. Burt Webb: "With regard to the conversation I had with you today, we are going to take this matter up and try to get a workable solution. " Earl Stanley: "Want to understand that the plan does not change any of the zoning in Cliff Haven as I do not want to be caught unaware. " Mr. Longmoor: Does not think Master Plan changes zoning too much. Mr. Stanley: Feels that if the zoning is going to be changed in districts people should be informed. Commissioner Longmoor stated that there werereports to be received from the following: Orange County Planning Director Harbor Manager Parks , Beaches & Recreation Commission Elementary School District Irvine Company • On motion of Commissioner Reed, seconded by Commissioner Copelin and carried, the hearing on the Master Plan will 'be continued until Thursday, September 269 at which time the reports from the above-mentioned will be considered. Commissioner Longmoor appointed the following committees to make reports and recommendations in connection with the three phases of the Master Plan: Land Use: Louis Briggs , Chairman Don Hayton Walter Longmoor Streets & Highway: George Lind, Chairman Burt Webb GI. Smith Ray Copelin Parks , Beaches , & Recreation: Galvin Keene, Chairman C . Rudd 0. B. Reed • Page 4 • A D D I T I O N A L B U S I N E S S Amendment #41 1. Tnird hearing on Resolution of Intention 614 to hold public hearings on certain changes to the Subdivision Ordinance. 2. Published June 27, 1957 3. On motion of Commissioner Copelin, seconded by Comm. Keene and carried, the Hearing on this Amendment was set over until the next regular meeting of the Commission. Amendment #42 1. Second hearing on Resolution of Intention 616 to hold public hearings on the zoning of the area known as "Superior Avenue Annexation" . 2. Published July 10, 1957 3. On motion of Commissioner Reed, seconded by Comm. • Copelin9 the Commission recommended to the City Council that the area known as "Superior Avenue Annexation's be zoned from an unclassified district to a M-1-A district. Said motion was carried by the following roll call vote, to wit: ALL AYES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Chairman recognized Mr. Henry Littlejohn, 208 40th Street, who stated he was the Mayor of the City of Baldwin Park and was very interested in what the Planning Commission was doing. He complimented the Commission on the fine job they are doing and only wished the people who were present had the proper foresight to plan for the future. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Business at hand being declared completed, the Commission meeting was adjourned on motion of Commissioner Copelin9 seconded by Comm. Reed, and carried. Ray Y. Copelin • Secretary EXHIBIT ugu MINUTES, ADJOURNED PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS NEWPORT BEACH CALIFORNIA October 24, 1957 THIRD HEARING ON MASTER PLAN Roll Call Commissioners Present: Reed, Copelin, Keene, Longmoor, Rudd, Lind Commissioners Absent: Smith, Briggs, Hayton Commissioner Longmoor opened the Third Hearing on the Master Plan by explaining that three committees covering the three -phases of the Master Plan had been appointed, but they had not received all of the reports desired from various organizations in order to complete and make a final recommendation to the • Commission as a whole. The committees covering the three phases of the Master Plan are as follows: ' Land Use Plan - Briggs, Chairman; Hayton and Longmoor Street & Highways - Lind, Chairman; Webb, Smith and Copelin Parks. Beaches & Recreation - Keene, Chairman; Reed and Rudd Cgmmissionex 1ongmoor stated that after the committees had received all the reports .ind.had drafted a recommendation to the Commission, a fourth and final public hearing would be held on the Master Plan. The final draft with 'changes, deletions ,or additions would then be submitted to the'City Council. He stated that if the City Council adopts the Master Plan as submitted that it must be reviewed and amended annually. It is not a fixed regulation or statute of law, but merely a guide. The Master Plan, to be beneficial to the City of Newport Beach, will necessitate a review each year to keep up with changing conditions. On motion of Commissioner Copelin, seconded by Commissioner Lind, and carried, the Third Hearing on the Master Plan was closed and December 5, 1957, was set as the date for the final hearing. Page 2 A D D I T I O N A L B U S I N E S S Submitted to the Planning Commission was an application for Use Permit #384 signed by Robert S. Gingrich, Director of Parks, Beaches & Recreation, City of Newport Beach to permit the installation of a sign on Lot 10, Block P. Tract 323, Corona del Mar. The purpose of the sign is to notify residents of the location and activities being conducted at the Community Youth Center in Corona del Mar. On motion of Commissioner Lind, seconded by Rudd, Use Permit #384 was approved, subject to the condition that the location of the sign on the property must be located not less than 10 ft. from the property line on either street, by the following roll call vote, to wit: ALL AYES The Planning Assistant submitted to the Commission a letter from the Orange County Planning Commission with an attached copy of a Use Variance Application filed by the Aeronutronics Systems, Inc., to permit the construction of a • building in an area now under consideration to be annexed to the City of Newport Beach. On motion of Commissioner Reed, seconded by Commissioner Copelin, Orange County Planning Commission Use Variance #3898 was approved by the following roll call vote, to wit: ALL AYES. The Commission, suggested that Chairman Longmoor draft a letter to the Orange County Planning Commission stating therein what uses will be permitted in this proposed industrial area when it is annexed to the City of Newport Beach. Commissioner Longmoor appointed Commissioner Lind and Planning Assistant J. W. Drawdy to appear at the Orange County Planning Commission Meeting at the time this application would be considered. Business at hand being declared completed, the Commission meeting was adjourned on motion of Commissioner Copelin, seconded by Commissioner Reed, and carried. Ray Y. Copelin Secretary E MIBIT agu MINUTES, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CITY':HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA December 5, 1957 FOURTH HEARING ON MASTER PLAN Roll Call Commissioners Present: Copelin, Keene, Longmoor, Smith, Rudd Lind Commissioners Absent: Reed, Sturtevant, Hayton Commissioner Walter Longmoor, Chairman, opened the fourth and final hearing had been received aster Plan b stating that recommendations on theproposed M y g from the following organizations: County of Orange City of Costa Mesa Newport Elementary School District Newport Harbor High School District Parks, Beaches and Recreation Citizens' Advisory Committee Commissioner Longmoor further stated that a recommendation had not been received from the Irvine Company, but that during the time the Master Plan has been under consideration the officials of the Irvine Co. have been very busy and occupied in working out plans for the location of the first industrial plant, the Aeronutronic Systems, Inc,, in the industrial park area as des- ignated in the Master Plan. He stated that no doubt a report would be received from the Irvine Co. , and the Master Plan could be amended to incorporate their recommendations. Commissioner Longmoor introduced Mr. Lawrence Wise of the Firm of Hahn, Wise & Associates who proceeded to explain the purpose of a master plan. He stated among other things, the following: "The final plans as received and adopted are not static and will probably have to be changed more rapidly than the last Master Plan. "The Master Plan is only a guide for the Planning Commission and the Legislative body and should be revised annually. "The Master Plan is geared to a ten to twenty-year future." Mr. Wise then proceeded to discuss the three phases of the Master Plan, namely: (a) Land use (b) Streets and highways (c) Parks and recreation He stated that in accordance with recommendations from the Planning Commission . that existing zoning in the old Newport areas would remain and that any changes necessary would be revised annually. New areas would remain as recommended in the original draft of the Master Plan. Page 2 Mr. Wise advised that the Parks, Beaches & Recreation map has been corrected in accordance with recommendations received from the Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission. in the original draft there was also proposed a school and playground area on Balboa Island and the Balboa Peninsula; however, these two sites have been deleted. Mr. Wise in covering the street and highway plan said that certain corrections had been made in accordance with the Street and Highway Committee of the Planning Commission and that certain recommendations of the traffic engineer, D. lack Faustman, had been considered and approved by the Planning Commission. The recommendations regarding this phase of the Faustman report is as follows: A recommendation that the traffic capacity of Newport Blvd. be increased by creating a one-way couplet. This couplet will provide one-way northerly traffic on Newport Blvd. .and a one-way southerly traffic on a portion of.the existing Pacific Electric right-a-way. The Commission also approved the traffic channelization of the intersection of McFadden Place, Balboa Blvd. and Newport Blvd. In addition to the above, the Commission has recommended that 32nd Street between Newport and Balboa Blvds. be widened. Mr. Wise stated that a connection such as this would alleviate the traffic on both Balboa and • Newport Blvds. and would provide some relief for the more than 9,000 cars which daily run into a jam at the dead,end of Via Lido at Newport Blvd. It would further provide an emergency escape valve to cars on Newport Blvd. in case a disaster should knock the Arches overpass out of commission. Mr. Wise further pointed out that it would also allow local drivers to avoid the McFadden channelization structures. Mr. Wise asked if anyone from the audience would like any further clarif- ication and Mrs. Robert Rae, 248 Poppy, stated that the existing land map showed her property as being R-2, however, it was zoned R-1. Mr. Wise stated that this was in error and the map would be corrected before submission to the City Council. On motion of Commissioner Copelin, seconded by Comm. Lind, and carried, the hearing on the fourth and final hearing of the proposed Master Plan was closed. Commissioner Keene moved the Commission take the Master Plan under submission and present it for final approval at the next regular meeting on December 19, 1957, seconded by Comm. Copelin and carried, by the following roll call vote, to wit: ALL AYES r Page 3 • A D D I T I O N A L B U S I N E S S VARIANCE #427 1. MACCO CORP. 2001 Sabrina Terrace, CDM 2. Lot 126 Tract 2813 Zone R- 1 3. Posted November 27, 1957, Published November 27, 1957 4. Detached garage on the front half of lot. 5. To maintain architectural design adopted by the subdivider. 6. DISCUSSION: Note findings 7. FINDINGS: This request is in keeping with the architectural design adopted by the subdivider and the Commission recommended approval. 8. On motion of Commissioner Keene, seconded by Comm. Copelin, and carried, Variance #427 was APPROVED by the following roll call vote, to wit: ALL AYES The Planning Assistant submitted to the Commission a building permit application for the construction of a industrial plant in the area known as the 1116th Street Annexation" which has been zoned M-1-A. The Commission recommended that the building be set back 70' from the front property line instead of 65' as shown on the plot plan in order to allow more space for parking and that a landscaping plot be furnished the Commission for approval prior to issuing a building permit. Business at hand being declared completed, the Commission meeting was adjourned on motion of Commissioner Copelin, seconded by Commissioner Keene, and carried. Ray Y. Copelin Secretary • � ! r INFORMATION City of Newport Beach + Newport Beech, Calif. November 81 1957 Planning Commission City of Newport Beach Newport Beach, Calif. Re: Committee Report On Part III Parks and Recreation of the proposed Master Plan for the City of Newport Beach. Gentlemen: Your Committee makes its recommendations on Para III, Perks and Recreation, of the proposed Master Plan as follows: 1. Part III of the proposed Master Plan has in effect been rewritten by the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission. Said Commission has submitted to the Planning Commission with covering letter dated October 23, 19579 its proposed revisions of Master Plan. Said Commission has further submitted to the Planning Commission a summary of recommendations . This summary of recommendations , in chartform on yellow paper, was originally prepared by Hahn and Wise. The Parks , Beaches and Recreation Commission has changed and modified said summary of recommendations by written corrections and deletions made thereon. The aforementiomd proposed revisions of the Master Plan and the revised summary of recommendations as submitted by the Parks , Beaches and Recreation Commission to the Planning Commission are incorporated herein and made a part hereof by reference. Your Committee recommends that Part III of the proposed Master Plan should be revised and changed to incorporate the aforementioned recommendations and revisions adopted by the Parks , Beaches , and Recreation Commission, 2. Your Committee recommends that there be no play- ground or school use in the Master Plan for the area known as the Grand Canal on Balboa Island. The aforementioned recommendations of the Parks, Beaches and Recreations Commission include this recommendation. We believe that the recommendations set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, which are intended to have Part III of the Master Plan apply primarily to undeveloped areas of the City with little or no% affect upon developed areas, will make said Part III more acceptable to the public. This should elimind;e any concern on the part of the public that Part III will seriously affect the areas of the City that are already developed. • 11/8/57 #2 Planning Commission Re: Committee report on Park III Master Plan �+. Your Commmttee further recommends that the recommendation of the Newport Beach Elementary School District relative to schools in the proposed Master Plan as covered in letter dated September 6, 1957 from Roy 0. Anderson, District Superintend- ant to Mr. W.M. Longmoor, Chairman Planning Commission, should be approved and that changes in the proposed Master Plan should be made in accordance with the content of said letter. Said letter is incorporated herein and made a part hereof by reference. 5. Your Committee further recommends that the recommendations received by the Planning Commmssion relative to Parks and Recreatnon from the Orange County Planning Commission and the Orange County Harbor Commission by way of written report dated September 27, 1957 from Harry E. Bergh, Orange County Planning Department, should be approved and that changes in the proposed Master Plan should be made in accordance with the content of said report as it applies to Parks and Recreation. The portion of said report which applies to Parks and Recreation is incorporated herein and made a part hereof by reference. Respectfully submitted PARKS, BEACHES AND RECREATION C Oi•,MI TTEE Messrs C .B. Rudd O.B. Reed Galvin Keene, Chairman INFOPMTION C • 0 P Y December 10, 1957 FINAL REPORT STREET AND HIGHWAY COMMITTEE at the PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALIFORNIA 1. The Committee approves the final map prepared by Hahn, Wise and Associates. This map incorporates all the changes recommended by the Committee. 2. It approves the plan of channelization of traffic between and across Balboa and Newport Boulevards at McFadden Place, presented in the Faustman report, and recommends the acquisition of additional right-of-way in the area affected to implement this channelization. The Committee specifically recommends that: a) The traffic capacity of Newport Boulevard be increased by-.-creating a one-way couplet. This couplet would provide one-way northerly traffic on Newport Boulevard and one-way southerly traffic on a portion of the exist- ing Pacific Electric Right-of-way. b) 32nd Street itself be widened to increase traffic cap- acity to and from the Lido Shopping Center. With the exception of the above specific recommendations, The Street and Highway Committee recommends that the Planning Com- mission go on record as concurring in the City Council's action in this matter. 3. The Committee approves the recommendations of the Orange County Planning Commission except: a) It is the belief of the committee that Jamboree Road should be made the major north-south street from Coast Highway to MacArthur Boulevard, easterly of Newport Upper Bay, with feeders to the aquatic parks, and that Bayside Drive now extending northerly from Coast Highway remain a minor street. b) Nineteenth Street, as recommended, should be class- ified a secondary street, should extend from Harbor Boulevard across the Newport Freeway to Irvine Avenue, rather than originating at the Freeway. r Page 2 These exceptions to the recommendations of the Orange County Planning Commission are shown on the final map submitted by Hahn,Wise and Associates. Respectfully submitted, STREET AND HIGHWAY COMMITTEE Messrs. Webb Smith Copelin Lind, Chairman