HomeMy WebLinkAboutC-2392 - Oasis Park Grading PSACITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
P.U. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 3884
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
(714) 640 -2251
TO: FINANCE DIRECTOR
PUBLIC WORKS
FROM: CITY CLERK
DATE: April 29, 1983
SUBJECT: Contract No. C -2392 (in cons. w/C -2316)
Description of Contract Agreement for Professional Services
for Oasis Park Grading
Effective date of Contract April 26, 1983
Authorized by Minute Action, approved on April 25, 1983
Contract with Jack P. Norris, RCE
Address 17662 Irvine Boulevard
Suite 7
Tustin, CA 92680
Amount of Contract See Agreement
11��ac- � G�u��iwcyc�
Wanda E. Andersen
City Clerk
WEA:lr
attach.
3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach
,
ORIGINAL
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES
FOR OASIS PARK GRADING
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of
-' 1983, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a municipal
corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CITY ", and the firm of JACK P. NORRIS,
RCE, hereinafter referred to as "ENGINEER."
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, CITY wishes to grade and contour an existing Corona del Mar
passive park site bounded on the south by 5th Avenue, on the east by OASIS
Parking Lot West, on the north by The Irvine Company property, and on the west
by Grant Howald Park parking lot; such grading and contouring hereinafter re-
ferred to as "SITE GRADING "; and
WHEREAS, in conjunction with SITE GRADING, CITY wishes to (1) demolish
the Jasmine Creek storm drain inlet and extend the 48 -inch diameter storm drain
approximately 125 feet northward to a new inlet to be built along CITY's north-
erly property line, (2) construct a 24- inch - diameter storm drain lateral 375
feet along Fifth Avenue from the Jasmine Creek storm drain to Larkspur Avenue,
and (3) construct a 12- foot -wide sidewalk -bike trail atop SITE GRADING from
Iris Avenue to Larkspur Avenue; such demolition, storm drain construction and
bike trail construction hereinafter referred to as "SITE IMPROVEMENTS ", and
WHEREAS, CITY wishes to construct a crib -type retaining wall and to
grade, concurrently with SITE GRADING, along the north side of 5th Avenue to
provide for street improvements between Jasmine and Larkspur Avenues; such wall
construction and concurrent grading hereinafter referred to as "5TH AVENUE
GRADING ", and
WHEREAS, CITY wishes to complete street and storm drain improvements
along the north side of 5th Avenue between Jasmine and Narcissus Avenues; such
improvements hereinafter referred to as "5TH AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS ", and
WHEREAS, ENGINEER has submitted a proposal to CITY dated April 8, 1983,
to provide engineering services for SITE GRADING, SITE IMPROVEMENTS, 5TH AVENUE
GRADING, and 5TH AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS; hereinafter referred to in aggregate as
"PROJECT ", and
1 of 5
WHEREAS, CITY desires to accept said proposal;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, the parties hereto
agree as follows:
I. General
A. CITY engages ENGINEER to perform the services hereinafter
described for the compensation hereinafter set forth.
B. ENGINEER agrees to perform said services upon the terms here-
inafter set forth.
II. Services to be Performed by Engineer
ENGINEER shall perform the following services:
A. Retain a soils consultant to provide a geotechnical investi-
gation including exploration, testing, analysis and a written
report. The investigation would include exploration, testing,
analyses, and a written report. Field work would be done
under the direct supervision of a qualified geotechnical
engineer or engineering geologist and would include at least
two test borings ranging in depth from 15 to 20 feet to obtain
samples and determine subsurface soil conditions.
Pertinent engineering properties of the native and anticipated
fill soils will be determined by appropriate field and labora-
tory tests including classification, dry density, shear
strength, expansion potential, consolidation characteristics,
corrosivity and sulphate content. The report would include
a summary of the field exploration, laboratory testing, and
results of the engineering analyses. Recommendations would
be given for 5TH AVENUE GRADING and SITE GRADING. Also in-
cluded will be an evaluation of settlement potential.
B. Prepare detailed construction plans, specifications and
Engineer's estimate (PS & E) for SITE GRADING and SITE
IMPROVEMENTS. (The Jasmine Creek inlet will be basically a
replication of the existing inlet with little modification.)
C. Provide a topographical survey to augment previous survey,
as necessary for the completion of Service B above.
2of5
0
D. Coordinate work described in Services A and B above with
CITY's Building Department to assure conformance with CITY's
grading ordinance.
E. Prepare detailed PS & E for 5TH AVENUE GRADING.
F. Provide a topographical survey to augment previous survey, as
necessary for the completion of Service E above.
G. Prepare detailed PS & E for 5TH AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS.
H. Provide a topographical survey to augment previous survey, as
necessary for the completion of Service G above.
I. Gather and review available record maps, land surveys, utility
plans, improvement plans, legal descriptions and other infor-
mation affecting PROJECT.
J. Utilize and reference the Standard Specifications for Public
Works Construction, 1982 Edition, and CITY's Standard Specifi-
cations and Standard Drawings for Public Works Construction,
1982 Edition, in the preparation of contract documents for
PROJECT.
III. Duties of CITY
CITY hereby agrees to provide ENGINEER with the following:
A. Available records concerning SITE GRADING boundaries, survey
data, CITY -owned utilities, etc.
B. Preliminary sketches describing the desired contours for
SITE GRADING and 5TH AVENUE GRADING.
C. Mylar sheets as needed for PROJECT plans.
IV. Time of Completion
Completion of those services A through F in Section II shall be
on or before July 1, 1983. Completion of All services specifie
in Section i1-Mal,l be on or .before August 5, 1983,E
V. Ownership of PROJECT Documents
Original drawings, reports, survey notes, maps and other PROJECT
documents shall become the property of CITY and may be reproduced
and utilized as deemed necessary by CITY; however, CITY shall
assume the defense of an indemnify and hold harmless ENGINEER from
claims, loss, damage, injury and liability arising from reuse of
PROJECT documents or detail thereof for work other than PROJECT.
3of5
VI. Right of Termination
CITY reserves the right to terminate this Agreement at any time
by providing ENGINEER three (3) days' prior written NOTICE OF
TERMINATION; such notice shall be deemed served upon deposit in
United States Mail or hand delivery to ENGINEER's business office
at 17662 Irvine Boulevard, Suite 7, Tustin, CA 92680. In the
event of termination due to error, omission or negligence of
ENGINEER, CITY shall be relieved of any obligation to compensate
ENGINEER for that specific portion of this Agreement affected by
such error, omission or negligence, and that specific portion of
service to be performed by ENGINEER shall remain the property of
ENGINEER. If this Agreement is terminated for any other reason,
CITY shall compensate ENGINEER in accordance with Section VII for
actual service performed to the effective date of the NOTICE OF
TERMINATION.
VII. Hourly Fees, Aggregate Compensation, and Payment
A. In consideration for those services specified in Section II,
CITY shall compensate ENGINEER an amount based upon the fol-
lowing hourly fees:
Classification Hourly Fees
Registered Engineer $ 50.00
Licensed Land Surveyor $ 46.00
Designer or Supervisor $ 40.00
Draftsman or Technician $ 34.00
Survey Crew (3 -man) $112.00
(2 -man) $ 90.00
(1 -man) $ 64.00
Clerical $ 20.00
B. In no event shall the sum of hourly fees and soils consultant
fees for services listed hereinafter be a greater amount than
the following aggregate compensation:
Service Aggregate
Compensation
Section II A $3,080.00
Section II B $9,500.00
Section II C $ 900.00
Section
II
E
$3,000.00
Section
II
F
$ 500.00
Section
II
G
$6,000.00
Section
II
H
$1,100.00
4of5
i 0
C. Additionally, ENGINEER may invoice CITY for 110% of direct
costs of reproductions.
D. CITY shall remit PAYMENT to ENGINEER within fourteen (14) days
after completion and submittal of all services specified in
Section II and invoice to CITY therefor. Invoice shall in-
clude an accounting of hours, dates, personnel and activities
charged against PROJECT.
VIII. Additional Work
CITY shall compensate ENGINEER in accordance with Section VII for
additional work authorized by CITY but not included in this
Agreement.
IX. Amendment
The scope of services to be performed by ENGINEER may be revised
and Aggregate Compensation amended with prior written approval of
CITY, except that an increase in Aggregate Compensation exceeding
One Thousand Dollars ($1,000) for any service shall require that
an amendment for such revision be processed and executed by the
parties hereto.
X. Assignment
This Agreement or any portion thereof shall not be assigned with-
out the prior written consent of CITY.
XI. Hold Harmless
ENGINEER shall assume the defense of and indemnify and hold harm-
less CITY and its officers and employees from claims, loss, damage,
injury and liability arising from error, omission or negligence
in ENGINEER's performance of services required by this Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement
on the date first written above.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By
.ty Attorney
CITY OF NE ORT BEACH
Xr
JACK P� NORRIS, RCE
I �
By JA,
'r
5 o 5
April 25, 1983
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
ITEM NO. I -1
• TO:. CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Public Works Department and Parks, Beaches and Recreation
Department
SUBJECT: OASIS PARK GRADING (C -2316)
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Accept, approve and certify the Final EIR as indicated in
Attachment A; .
2. Make the findings contained in the Statement of Facts (Attach-
ment A, Exhibit 1) with respect to significant impacts identi-
fied in the Final EIR:
3. Find that the facts set forth in'the Statement of Overriding
Considerations (Attachment A, Exhibit 2) are true and are
• supported, by substantial evidence in the record, including
the Final EIR:
4. With respect to the project, find that although the Final
EIR identifies certain unavoidable significant environmental
effects that will result if the project is approved, those
mitigation measures identified in the Certified Final EIR
shall be incorporated into the proposed project, and all sig-
nificant environmental effects that can feasibly be mitigated
or avoided have been eliminated or reduced to an acceptable
level, and that the remaining unavoidable significant effects,
when balanced against the facts set forth in said Statement
of Overriding Considerations (Attachment A, Exhibit 2),
giving greater weight to the unavoidable environmental effects,
are acceptable;
5. Approve grading concept Alternative 39 for final design of the
project; and
6. Authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute a professional
services agreement with Jack P. Norris, RCE.
• DISCUSSION:
On September 27, 1982, the Council considered four grading concepts
for this project. Following public comments, the Council then (1) approved
grading concept Alternative No. 3, (2) directed staff to proceed with an
Page 2
Subj: OASIS PARK.GRADING (C -2316)
April 25, 1983
•
environmental assessment and to report back to Council prior to commence-
ment of engineering, and (3) directed staff to include in the environmental
assessment an additional alternative which utilizes a maximum volume of fill
within the City's OASIS Park site.
Subsequent to the September 27 Council meeting, staff prepared
data for the additional alternative (known as Alternative No. 3A) and retained
Culbertson, Adams and Associates of Mission Viejo to prepare the environ-
mental assessment.
In January of 1983 staff developed another alternative (known as
Alternative No. 3B) resulting from a petition, and from a recommendation of
the Traffic Affairs Committee. The petition, referred by Council to the
Traffic Affairs Committee on August 9, 1982, requested a change in traffic
circulation along 5th Avenue between Jasmine and Larkspur Avenues to mitigate
a potentially very dangerous (traffic circulation), situation." The
Traffic Affairs Committee's recommendation was that (1) Fifth Avenue between
Jasmine and Larkspur Avenues should be widened to 32 feet in conjunction with
the OASIS Park site grading,.and (2) Fifth Avenue between Jasmine and Larkspur
Avenues should be made one -way until the roadway can be widened. The Council's
January 24, 1983, unanimous motion directed that "one lane road" caution signs
be posted along 5th Avenue.
Alternative No. 3B provides for the same park site improvements as
the Council- approved grading Alternative No. 3, except that 5th Avenue is also
graded to allow for a future 32 -foot street improvement to provide for two -
way traffic flow between Jasmine and Larkspur Avenues. See attached Exhibit
"Proposed Fifth Avenue Street and Storm Drain Improvements." Funding for such
street improvements, and for storm drain and street improvements on the north
side of 5th Avenue between Jasmine and Narcissus Avenues, has been requested
in the Fiscal Year 1983 -84 budget. (Note: The City owns all property along
the north side of 5th Avenue between Goldenrod and Narcissus Avenues.)
An environmental assessment titled "OASIS Park Grading Environmental
Impact Report," has been completed and is included in Council packets. "Notices
of Completion" have been forwarded from the Planning Department to interested
parties, including all residents and property owners within 300 feet of the
park site. A 30 -day public review period ended on April 14. Copies of re-
sponses to the review are attached hereto.
If park site grading is to be performed this year, engineering
must proceed at once so that storm drain construction may be completed prior
to next winter's storm season. Accordingly, staff has obtained a proposal
from Jack P. Norris, RCE, to provide the following professional services for
Page 3
Subj: OASIS PARK WING (C -2316)
April 25, 1983
the project for compensation shown in parentheses:
• 1. Soils investigation under the supervision of a geotechnlcal
engineer working for Moore & Taber, Inc., including at least two
test borings, testing, analysis and a written report ($3,080);
2. Detailed construction plans, specifications and Engineer's Esti-
mate (PS & E) for the Jasmine Creek storm drain extension and
inlet; the 5th Avenue storm drain lateral; the park parcel grading
and contouring; and the bike trail construction ($9,500);
3. Topographical survey to augment previous survey as needed for the
completion of item 2 above ($900);
4. Detailed construction PS & E for the 5th Avenue grading ($3,000);
5. Topographical survey to augment previous survey as needed for the
completion of item 4 above ($500);
6. Coordinate items 1 and 2 with the Building Department to assure
conformance with the City's grading ordinance (NC);
7. Detailed construction PS & E for extending the 5th Avenue storm
drain later and the 5th Avenue street improvements (north side)
to Narcissus Avenue ($6,000); and
• 8. Topographical survey to augment previous survey as needed for the
completion of item 7 above ($1,100).
Compensation would be in accordance with Norris' hourly fee sched-
ule (attached) with a total fee for services specified above not to exceed
$24,080. In addition, a $2,500 allowance for additional professional services,
such as those staff deems necessary due to conditions discovered during con-
tract preparation or construction, will be provided for in the contract. Ade-
quate funds are budgeted in Account No. 02- 3497 -252 to compensate the consultant
The contract documents are to be completed on or before July 8, 1983.
Barring unforeseen delay, work could commence on or about August 15, 1983, and
be completed circa November 15, 1983.
BenJamin B. Nolan Ronald A. Whitley
Public Works Director Parks, Beaches & Recreation Director
LRD:jd
Att.: 1. Sketch: "Proposed Fifth Avenue Street and Storm Drain Improvements"
• 2. Attachment "A" - Actions & Findings
Exhibit 1 - Statement of Facts
Exhibit 2 - Statement of Overriding Considerations
3. Attachment No. 1 to the Draft EIR
4. Draft EIR (in pocket)
5. Fee Schedule
�1
Ll II N
I �•�a � ' dl� a � Z
I F V) w
I L w.�
C3
V)
-, a
� I
LI ra--- - - - --� (i W Z
IN 41001NO
U
I :L
I GYM
L
L
1 1� 1 C=WI IId o 0
I =F W V
I I a I I I o u
v
I
3nrt$Ar
as
711ai110arti = y
c �
I II
p 3 1 I `
I
� alusaar�
Y
a
� a
I
.1
� I
4
o
,nr ams►c
illd MVMG Nio16 l i
MilN 10MWI 'CIYi // \
•
•
•
•
is
•
ATTACHMENT "A"
ACTIONS & FINDINGS
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
1. Accepting and approving the Environmental Document with the following
findings:
a. The City of Newport Beach has prepared a Final Environmental
Impact Report consisting of those items indicated below:
1. Draft EIR
2. Attachment No. 1 to the Draft EIR
3. Minutes of the City Council meetings of April 25, 1983
4. All correspondence and information received prior to
the certification of this EIR and not included in 1
through 3 above.
b. The City Council of Newport Beach accepts and approves the
Final EIR and certifies that the Final EIR has been
California Environmental Quality Act (hereinafter referred to
as "CEQA ") and the State EIR Guidelines (hereinafter referred
to as "Guidelines ") and fully complies with, and satisfies,
all of the requirements of CEQA and the Guidelines.
C. The City Council of Newport Beach certifies that it has
reviewed and considered the information contained in the
Final EIR in conjunction with the decision and approval
associated with this project.
d. That in order to reduce adverse impacts of the proposed
project, all feasible mitigation measures discussed in the
environmental document have been incorporated into the
proposed project. Specific economic, social or other
consideration make infeasible any other potential mitigation
measures or alternative to the proposed project.
e. The the mitigation measures to be incorporated into the
proposed project are contained in the Draft EIR.
B. STATEMENT OF FACTS
1. Make the Findings, contained in the Statement of Facts (Exhibit 1) ,
with respect to significant impacts identified in the Final EIR.
C. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
1. Find that the facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding
Consideration (Exhibit 2) are true and are supported by substantial
evidence in the record, including the Final EIR.
6 0 0
D. PROJECT FINDING
I. With respect to the project, find that although the Final EIR
identifies certain unavoidable significant environmental effects that •
will result if the project is approved, those mitigation measures
identified in the Draft EIR shall be incorporated into the proposed
project, and all significant environmental effects that can feasibly
be mitigated or avoided have been eliminated or reduced to an
acceptable level, and that the remaining unavoidable significant
effects, when balanced against the facts set forth in said Statement
of Overriding Considerations (Attachment 2), giving greater weight to
the unavoidable environmental effects, are acceptable.
E. PROJECT ACTION
1. Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a professional services
agreement with Jack P. Norris, RCE.
•
0
•
•
0
STATEMENT OF FACTS
April 25, 1983
0
EXHIBIT 1
SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS WHICH CANNOT
BE AVOIDED IF THE PROPOSAL IS IMPLEMENTED,
FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO IMPACTS, AND STATEMENT
OF FACTS IN SUPPORT THEREOF, ALL WITH RESPECT TO
THE PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION OF THE OASIS PARK
GRADING PROJECT IN NEWPORT BEACH.
BACKGROUND
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines
(Guidelines) promulgated pursuant thereto provide:
"No public agency shall approve or carry out a
project for which an environmental impact report
has been completed and which identifies one or
more significant effects of the project unless
the public agency makes one or more of the
following written findings for each of the
significant effects, accompanied by a statement
of the facts supporting each finding ". (Section
15088 of the Guidelines)
The City of Newport Beach has proposed the implementation of a grading project
for the Oasis Park. Because this constitutes a project under CEQA and the
Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has prepared an Environmental Impact
Report (EIR). This EIR has identified certain significant effects that will
flow from this project and should the City Council desire to approve this
project, after determining that the EIR is complete and has been prepared in
accordance with CEQA and the Guidelines, the findings set forth herein should
be made.
a • •
BIOLOGY
IMPACTS •
Y 1. Significant riparian vegetation will be removed from the site.
FINDINGS
a) Specific economic, social and other considerations make infeasible the
mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR.
b) The significant effect which remains will be substantially lessened
through the incorporation of mitigation measures into the construction
phase of the project, and the remaining effect is, when balanced against
the facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, and
giving greater weight to the significant effects, acceptable.
FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
a) The project will provide increased habitat a different nature.
b)
The project is consistent with
the General Plan and policies of the City
•
of Newport Beach.
c)
The project will comply with
all conditions of approval required under
project permits.
d)
The project will link two
areas of the community with appropriate
pedestrian and bicycle paths.
e)
The project may decrease crime
related problems in the area by making the
area more visible.
f) The project will provide increased recreational opportunities to the
community.
g) The project will provide reasonable grades for utilization of the area and
pedestrian circulation by members of oasis.
h) The project will provide appropriate measures to revegetate the area.
91
•
0 •
AESTHETICS
IMPACT
1. views from adjacent residences will be altered.
FINDINGS
a) Specific economic, social and other considerations make infeasible the
mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR.
b) The significant effect which remains will be substantially lessened
through the incorporation of mitigation measures into the construction
phase of the project, and the remaining effect is, when balanced against
the facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, and
giving greater weight to the significant effects, acceptable.
FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
a) The existing area has a man -made structure and the view presented is not
currently that of a pristine natural environment.
1 b) The project is consistent with the General Plan and policies of the City
of Newport Beach.
C) The project will comply with all conditions of approval required under
project permits.
d) The project will link two areas of the community with appropriate
pedestrian and bicycle paths.
e) The project may decrease crime related problems in the area by making the
area more visible.
f) The project will provide increased recreational opportunities to the
community.
g) The project will provide reasonable grades for utilization of the area and
pedestrian circulation by members of Oasis.
h) The project will provide appropriate measures to revegetate the area.
•
lO
EXHIBIT 2
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
1.
The alternatives to the proposed project described in the Final EIR, with
the exception of the "No Project" alternative, would not avoid the
•
unavoidable environmental effects of the proposed project.
2.
The project will tie the community through enhanced pedestrian and bicycle
circulation.
3.
The proposed project does not preclude the retention of remainder of the
drainage area in its existing state.
4.
The proposed project will increase passive recreational opportunities
within the area.
i
5.
The proposed project will create an attractive addition to the existing
park facility.
6.
The proposed project will eliminate a potentially dangerous area due to
lack of adequate present ability to observe the area.
7.
The proposed project will not preclude the expansion of the area into an
active recreation area if this is deem appropriate at a latter date.
•
0 f
Attachment No. 1
to the
DRAFT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
prepared by
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92663
(714) 640 -2197
and
Culbertson, Adams and Associates, Inc.
27072 E1 Retiro
Mission Viejo, CA 92692
(714) 643 -1622
April 15, 1983
12
• 0
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 - 3
COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT EIR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 - 21
ISSUES, QUESTIONS, COMMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I - 53
!3
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
•
•
DATE March 8, 1983
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN
0 NOTICE OF COMPLETION
FROM: CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
P.O. BOX 1768
3300 W. Newport Blvd.
Newport Beach, CA 92663 -3•
DATE: March 7, 1983
PROJECT OASIS PARK GRADING
TITLE:
PROJECT LOCATION -
SPECIFIC: North of 5th Avenue, Iris Avenue to
Larkspur Avenue, Corona del
Mar
PROJECT LOCATION.-
PROJECT LOCATION -
CITY: Newport Beach
COUNTY: Orange
DESCRIPTION OF NATURE, PURP05E AND BENEFICIARIES
OF PROJECT:
Extend Jasmine Creek Storm Drain 125 feet and construct new headworks; construct 375
lin. ft. of storm drain along 5th Avenue between
Jasmine Creek and Larkspur
Avenue;
grade across Jasmine Gully with onsite stockpiled
earth; construct sidewalk
bike trail
between Iris and Larkspur Avenues; remove excess
stockpiled earth from site;
and
hydroseed. Disruption of riparian habitat; and
earthwork.
The City of Newport Beach is the Lead Agency for this project. A copy of the Draft
Environmental Impact Report:
Q 1
is attached for your review
❑ is available for review at the
Planning Department
3300 West Newport Blvd.
Newport Beach, CA 92663 -3884
REVIEW PERIOD: 30 DAYS ENDING ON: April 14, 1983
Draft EIR Environmental.
CONTACT PERSON: Fred Talarico TITLE: Coordination PHONE: (714)640 -2197
PROJECT CONTACT: Lloyd Dalton, Design Engineer (714) 640 -2281
y i5 DATE March 8, 1983 i NOTICE OF COMPLETION .
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
FROM: CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
P.O. BOX 1768
3300 W. Newport Blvd.
Newport Beach, CA 92663 -3884
DATE: March 8, 1983
PROJECT
TITLE: OASIS PARK GRADING
PROJECT LOCATION -
SPECIFIC: North of 5th Ave., Iris Ave. to Larkspur Ave., Corona del Mar
PROJECT LOCATION.- PROJECT LOCATION -
CITY: Newport Beach COUNTY: Orange
DESCRIPTION OF NATURE, PURPOSE AND BENEFICIARIES OF PROJECT:
Extend Jasmine Creek Storm Drain 125 feet & construct new headworks; construct 375
lin. ft. of storm drain along 5th Avenue between Jasmine Creek & Larkspur Avenue;
grade across Jasmine Gully with onsite stockpiled earth; construct sidewalk bike
rail between Iris and Larkspur Avenues; remove excess stockpiled earth from site;
d hydroseed. Disruption of riparian habitat; and earthwork.
The City of Newport Beach is the Lead Agency for this project. A copy of the Draft
Environmental Impact Report:
REVIEW PERIOD: 30 DAYS
❑ is attached for your review
® is available for review at the
Planning Department
3300 West Newport Blvd.
Newport Beach, CA 92663 -3884
ENDING ON: April 14, 1983
DRAFT EIR
CONTACT PERSON: Fred Talarico TITLE: Environmental CoordinatorPHONE: (715) 640 -2197
PROJECT CONTACT: Lloyd Dalton, Design Engineer (714) 640 -2281
SPON - c/o Jean Watt
4 Harbof Island Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Ib
;Resident
700 Heliotrope Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
League of Women Voters, O.C. Resident
701- WesiEliff BP 'OneXt' 704 Heliotrope Ave.
Newport Beach, CA 92660 sh, a Corona del Mar, CA 92625
C0 4C j
Audubon Society -Sea & Sage Cp; Resident
P. 0. Box 1779 706 Heliotrope Ave.
Santa Ana, CA 92702
Corona del Mar. CA 92625
Sierra COY Orange Cty.Grp
P. 0. B 7033
Garde ve, CA 92642
Friends of Irvine Coast
P. 0. Box 714
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Sutton News Group
2721 East Coast Hwy.
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Steve Marvel - Daily Pilot
P. 0. Box 1560
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Newport -Mesa Unfd Sch. Dist.
1857 Placentia Avenue
Costa Mesa, CA 92627
So. Calif. Gas Co.
Attn: W. R. Perkins
P. 0. Box 3334
Anaheim, CA 92803
So. Calif. Edison Co.
Attn: W. E. Guffey
7333 Bolsa Ave.
Westminster, CA 92683
Resident
707 Iris Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA 92626
Resident
702 Heliotrope Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Resident
711 Iris Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Frank Simon
701 Iris Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Fred Sotomayer
700 Heliotrope Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Harvey R. Paeden
703 Iris Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
104e-�er `, < <' r.'. >,e
&i-1 bert- A- 44tehel T = x 0'2"'r,d
1617-- f:- fi*1bea -BHvd.
boa-,-f *--42W '{ 2,
I
*Ross E. Mot4i .v
3411,E 1 Ma Hwy
Corgis l Mar, CA 92625
Thomas J. Viola
980 Hampton Rd.
Arcadia, CA 91006 •
Georgia H. Hovis
709 Iris Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Harlan W. Hoyt
708 Heliotrope Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Michae ajoiI10
1811 eoey Ave.
Newp,i each, CA 92663
Robert G. Monger •
710 Heliotrope Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
James M. Melbon
1807 Port Abbey P1.
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Resident
715 Iris Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Resident
717 Iris Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Resident
716 Heliotrope Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
R£tnge ho. &food Control Robent( ,�1'fRister Resident
n. r. runner 77 LLhrt Avenue
4500 Civic Cntr. Dr. Co5'' 1 718 Heliotrope Ave.
an Ana, CA 92702v a Mar, CA 92625 Corona de Mar, CA 92625
Resident 7 Carlton J. Smith
701 Jasmine Ave. 23811 Via Fabricante
17-Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Mission Viejo, CA 92691
Resident John A. Allard
700 Iris Ave. P. 0. Box 134
�ona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Resident E. W. Robinson,
703 Jasmine Ave. 30631 Marilyn Dr.
Corona del Mar, CA 92625 South Laguna, CA 92677
Resident John Bellamy
702 Jasmine Ave. 144 Jasmine Creek Dr.
Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Resident Douglas B. Eynon
705 Jasmine Ave. 12 Hidalgo
Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Irvine, CA 92625
is Stieber Resident
Heliotrope Ave. 708 Jasmine Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Ronald L .C8rl
'` � � Resident
13134 wood
0 Jasmine Ave.
Houston Tex. 77079 Corona del Mar, CA 92625
1
Donald LeFever Resident
715 Heliotrope Ave. , 714 Iris Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625
I
James Allen Resident
522 El Modena Ave. 717 Jasmine Ave.
Newport Beach, CA 92663 Corona del Mar, CA 92625
•
Weir G. Smith Resident
P. 0. Box 67 719 Jasmine Ave.
Stratford, CA 93266 Corona del Mar, CA 92625
lIri�' Ramona R. Host
orona a ar, CA 92625 704 -A Iris Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Mabel McKay
707 Jasmine Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Jeffrey Cunningham
706 -A Iris Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Wayne J. Laurent
P. 0. Box 67836
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Lawrence A. Jordan
711 JasmineAve.
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Ann Lessig Corzine
710 Iris Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Dennis E. Casino
713 Jasmine
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Wallace ct e�rhead
712 Iris" Ave.
Coro��� del Mar, CA 92625
Ione Wade
484 Del Rosa Dr.
Pasadena, CA 92625
Robert J. Sunderland
3601 Seabreeze Lane
Corona Del Mar, CA 92625
Jerome P. Tripoli
P. 0. Box 192
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
CoPatricia qqZ. Hicks
rona!�elv�lar, CA 92625
Roger G. Byron David Lenton
13422•Newport Ave. 23 Encore Crt.
Tustin, CA 92680 Newport Beach, CA 92663
18
Resident Martin A. Melanson
718 Iris Ave. 224 Iris Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Resident Helen E. Weiss.
720 Iris Ave. 700; Jasmine Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625
}
Resident Stanley Winter
701 Larkspur Ave. 18172 Mayapple 3'
Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Irvine, CA 9%
Resident Margaret R. Armstrong
700 Jasmine Avenue 702 Jasmine Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Resident Doris M. Sullivan
703 Larkspur Ave. 8409 Citadel Way
Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Sacramento, CA 95825
Resident
717 Larkspur Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA
Resident
716 Jasmine Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA
Resident
720 Jasmine Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA
Jerry Taylor
711 Larkspur Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA
92625
926
92625
92625
Arvo E. Haapa
710 Jasmine Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
9
Larkspur 2W Asssociate
713 Larks'adF� Ave.
CoronaftkT Mar, CA 92625
Resident
705 Larkspur Avenue
Gerard P. Tardie
26 Lakeside
G
G
George B. Farrell
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Irvine, CA 92714
J O. Box 282
I Corona del Mar, CA
92625
Resident
Olga B. Jeffrey
I William F. Agee
704 Jasmine Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
707 Larkspur
Corona del Mar, CA
92625
i 715 Larkspur Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA
92625
Resident
Richard Huffman
709 Larkspur Ave.
708 Jasmine Ave.
Marguerite Dalziel
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Corona del Mar, CA
92625
714 Jasmine Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA
92625
•
Jon M. Jarvis �fl.ly
37 St. Tropez
Triona B. Campagna
514 Fernleaf Ave.
Hugo Di Lonardo
Newport Beach, 92660
Corona del Mar, CA
92625
9532 Via Salerno
Burbank, CA 92625
Elizabeth A. Trotter
Resident
721 Jasmine Ave.
712 Jasmine Ave.
Richard C. Hunsaker
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Corona del Mar, CA
92626
3512 Ocean Blvd.
Corona del Mar, CA
92625
Charles Newton
Robert
�j
Carl Ziegler
•;
Gerhard N. Rostvold
Searles
701 Marguerite Ave.
P. 0. Box 188
719 Larkspur Avenue
Corona del Mar, CA
92625
Corona del Mar, CA
92625
Corona del Mar, CA
92625
-
I
Chase 0. Sanderson
Robert Jape: w , ?. hrc8i i
Resident
718 Jasmine Ave.
del Mar, CA
92625
700 Larkspur Ave4
Corona del Mar, CA
92625
715 Marguerite Ave.
�ona
Corona del Mar, CA
92625
John D. Allen
Willis E. Nielsen
Resident
721 Larkspur
Corona del Mar, CA
92625
707 Marguerite Ave.
717 Marguerite Ave.
I
Corona del Mar, CA
92625 j
Corona del Mar, CA
92625
dehaan"en-tre
7�-�jasmine- Avenue
�'° �'s~ "
Alice J. Chambers
Resident
Corona del Mar, CA
92625
P 0. Box 306
Corona del Mar, CA
92625
716 Larkspur Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA
92625
Resident',
705 Avenue
Peter G. Leider
Richard P. Succa
CoroMar, CA
704 Larkspur Ave.
715 Marguerite Ave.
Perite
Corona del Mar, CA
92625
i
Corona del Mar, CA
92625
ident
Calvin P. Pierce
I
Charles Solari
Larkspur Avenue
orona del Mar, CA
92625
706 Larkspur Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA
92625
Maurine Wilson
714 Larkspur Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA
92625
Resident
709 Marguerite Ave.
Lawrence V. Harison
W. Moseley
Corona del Mar, CA
92625
2515 E. Coast Hwy
Corona del Mar, CA
92625 !
P. 0. Box 312
Corona del Mar, CA
92625
Resident
• 708 Larkspur Avenue
Stephen F. Piper
2524 Ocean Blvd.
i
Helen C. Long
Corona del Mar, CA
92625
Corona del Mar, CA
92625 i
I
1561 Mesa Dr. # 32
Santa Ana, CA 92625
Resident
711 Marguerite
I. Moreno
2613 Via Olivera
Frank A. Williams
Corona del Mar, CA
92625
Palos Verdes Estates,
CA 90274
719 Marguerite Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA
92625
Osident
710 Larkspur Ave.
John A. Allard
2515 E. Coast Hwy
Joseph Gallo
p Ga o
Corona del Mar, CA
92625
Corona del Mar, CA
92625
718 Larkspur Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA
92625
Resident Gerald Obert John H. Marshall
112 LarksquA Ave 713 Marguerite Ave. 721 Marg
orona a ar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Coro .
na del Mar, Ave. 92625
Robert G. Wolff
720 Larkspur Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Corona del Mar. Com. Assoc.
Mr. Richard Nichols, Pres.
P.O. Box 516
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
The Irvine Co.
550 Newport Center Dr.
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Leslie B. Jones
2021 Business Center Dr.,
Irvine, CA 92715
Diane Dixon
2888 Bayshore Drive, Apt
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Terry Smith
324 Alverado Place
Balboa, CA 92661
Bernard Pegg
2633 Bamboo Street
Newport Beach, CA
Liaison:
• THE FOLLOWING WERE ST OEIR:
Dept. of Water Resources Ron Covington
Attn: Ken Fellows 707 Orchid
1416 Ninth Street Corona del. Mar,
Sacramento, CA 95814
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Attn: Jack Fancher
24000 Avila Road
Laguna Niguel, CA 92677
Dept of Conservation
Ste :Attn: Rick Mevis, Env. Cons
112 Program Coordinator
1416 Ninth Street, Room 1354
Sacramento, CA 95814
Dept. of Fish & Game
Fred A. Worthley, Jr.,Reg.Mgr.
350 Golden Shore
Long Beach, CA 90802
U.S. Army Corps of Engrs.
Environmental Resources
.Attn: Sid Levenson
P.O. Box 2711
!Los Angeles, CA 90053
CA 92625 •
Janice De Bay
5107 Seashore Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Mary Lou Zoglin
10 Surfside Court
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Brion Jeannette
470 Old Newport Blvd.
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Buzz Person
201 Shipyard Way
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Cal. Regional Water Quality
Bobby Lovell
Control Board
1242 W. Ocean Front
Attn: Gordon Anderson
Newport Beach, CA 92661
6809 Indiana Avenue
_1 Riverside, CA 92506
State Clearinghouse
Robert Moody
C Office of Planning & Research
5507 Seashore Drive
1400 Tenth St., Room 250
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Sacramento, CA 95814
State Water Resources Control Bd.
Jim Turner
Attn: John Huddleson,Region #i8
435 Irvine Ave.
1416 Ninth Street
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Sacramento, CA 95814
.
Corona del Mar Community Assoc
Mr. Richard Nichols, President
92660 P.O. Box 516
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Council Members Jackie Heather
& Donald Strauss
Tom Thomson
P.O. Box 5100
Balboa Island, CA 92625
Chriss Street
619 Heliotrope
Corona del Mar.
Barbara Cope
16 Kia Loa Court
Newport Beach, CA 92663
ca
•
COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT
•
•
9 0
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
P.O. BOX 1768, N EWPORT BEACH, CA 926633884
CITIZENS
April 7, 1983
Newport Beach City Council
3300 West Newport Blvd.
P.O. BOX 1768
Newport Beach, CA 92663 -3884
QUALITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE
SUBJECT: Draft EIR "Oasis Park Grading Project"
Honorable Mayor and Council:
The Citizens Environmental Quality Advisory Committee at its meeting
of April 5, 1983 reviewed this letter on the above subject Draft EIR
and the Oasis Park Grading Project. The Committee offers the
following comments for the Councils consideration in its review of
this project.
A. Comments on the Project
It appears that there is considerable local concern over this
project and the use of this site. The project as presented
appears appropriate.
B. Comments on the Draft EIR
It is the opinion of the Committee that the Draft EIR does not
adequately address the following:
1. The alternatives need to be expanded in their depth of
analysis.
2. The report should more closely explain the relationship
of actions on this site, the School District Property and
Irvine Company Properties.
3. The report is also not clear as to the extent or nature
of any flood control problems in the project area.
Respectfully submitted,
CITIZENS ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE
By l
J nice De Bay
hairma
X300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach
JDB:FT:tn
•
•
0
a3 TO: FRED TALARICO
SLMOMT: EVPLL%TICN CF OASIS PARK GRADING EIR
0 DARE: MARCH 28, 1983
The Suboonmiteee respectfully subxmi.ts the following cam ents on the Oasis
Park Grading EIR.
1. Description of the proposed project under II.A., page 2 -1 describes
the effort as a budgeted storm drain project.
2. If, as it appears, intent of the EIR is for a storm drain project, why
is the work addressed as a park? Tnhiy not sirply address it as a storm
drain project?
3. Is proposed grading intended to be sufficient to provide for extension,
as well as widening, of 5th Avenue?
4. Iteas V. Cumulative Impacts, page 5 -1 and VI. Crowth Inducing Impacts,
page 6 -1, indicate that if proposed project is adopted, it will likely
be imossible to retain the remainder of Jasmine Creek. In that context
we question whether the proposed park will create or provide Dore
• recreation possibilities than the existing site in its natural state.
5. Insufficiently presented was an alternative which could have explored
a project between the Irvine Company, School District and the City, all
landowners adjacent to Oasis Park. How does this project tie in with
develognent of adjacent properties?
is
6. The subcommittee raised questions with the entire EIR in this regard -
whether enough information has been offered to provide a clear, ecmpre-
hensive view of subject site in relation to adjacent sites.
7. EIR insufficiently explores alternatives. Additional alternatives such
as 3A, which could have made a more cm plete and comprehensive recrea-
tional facility, were not adequately addressed.
8. Referring to Environmental Checklist Form, Item 19, Recreation, this
Subcmvdttee suggests that existing recreation opportunities mught be
better than proposed project.
9. Is there a flood problem? Will future develounent above the site
worsen the problem?
Respectfully submitted,
A ,
i � � f/+ l�►ia "7v
CEQAC - Letter of April 7, 1983
• Comment 1: The alternatives need to be expanded in their depth of analysis.
(CEQAC)
Response 1: The proposed project is discussed in the Draft EIR. The Draft
EIR describes all reasonable alternatives to the project which
could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the project and why
they were rejected in favor of the project. The concern of the
CEQAC with the level of discussion may not be warranted. The
City of Newport Beach GPA 81 -2 request of the Irvine Co. related
to parcels within the area has been /will be in the near future
tabled (based on straw votes of April 11, 1983). The project
does not preclude any options dealing with adiacent properties.
Comment 2: The report should more closely explain the relationship of
actions on this site, the School District Property and Irvine
Company Properties. (CEQAC)
Response 2: Relationships between this project and adjacent landholdings are
discussed in the Draft FIR. The property immediately to the
north has been the subject of a general plan amendment request
• for the past two years. Any actions taken on this project will
not preclude any action on that request. There are no known
proposals for the adjacent NMUSO properties to the north and
west. The remaining public projects are as outlined in the Draft
EIR, staff reports to the City Council on this project and
described in the preliminary budget.
Comment 3: The report is also not clear as to the extent or nature of any
flood control problems in the project area.
Response 3: The proposed project will not create any flood control problems
within the area. The addition of curb, gutter, sidewalk and
other proposed public improvement to Fifth Avenue from the
project site to Marguerite Avenue will lessen or eliminate flood
control problems that currently exist within this area.
CEQAC - Memo of March 28, 1983
Comment 1: Description of the proposed project under II.A., Page 2 -1
describes the effort as a budgeted storm drain project.
Response 1: The proposed project is budgeted as a storm drain project.
Additional funds have been requested in the preliminary fiscal
year 83/84 budget for the PB &R Department to take the project
from rough grade to finished product.
Comment 2: If, as it appears, intent of the EIR is for a storm drain
project, why is the work addressed as a park? Why not simply
address it as a storm drain project?
Response 2: The proposed project is budgeted as a storm drain project. •
Additional funds have been requested in the preliminary fiscal
year 83/84 budget for the PB &R Department to take the project
from rough grade to finished product.
Comment 3: Is proposed grading intended to be sufficient to provide for
extension, as well as widening, of 5th Avenue?
Response 3: The grading will provide for the extension of Fifth Avenue to
Jasmine Avenue. The limit of this budgeted project will be the
grading and retention necessary to provide for road extension.
Comment 4: Items V. Cumulative Impacts, Page 5 -1 and VI. Growth Inducing
Impacts, Page 6 -1, indicate that if proposed project is adopted,
it will likely be impossible to retain the remainder of Jasmine
Creek. In that context we question whether the proposed park
will create or provide more recreation possibilities than the
existing site in its natural state.
Response 4: The Draft EIR notes that the retention of the remaining 1,1000 •
feet of Jasmine Creek in its existing state may prove infeasible.
It should be noted that the proposed project does not preclude
retention of the remaining area in its existing state. This
could only be determined at such time as the adjoining property -
owners (The Irvine Company and Newport /Mesa Unified School
District) were to submit development plans for this area.
The proposed project will create more recreational opportunities
than exist on the site in its existing condition the
opportunities will be passive in nature with the exception of the
bicycle trail. The project does not preclude the transition of
the area into a more active recreational area if that were to be
determined feasible at a latter date.
Comment 5: Insufficiently presented was an alternative which could have
explored a project between the Irvine Company, School District
and the city, all landowners adjacent to Oasis Park. How does
this project tie in with development of adjacent properties?
Response 5: The Draft EIR describes all alternatives to the project that
could reasonably
alternative that
attain the basic objectives of the
include all property- owners with
project. An
an ultimate
design for their
properties is not reasonable
at
present.
Additionally the
proposed project will not preclude
any
presently
know alternative
use or design for either adjacent
property
owner.
Comment 6: The subcommittee raised questions with the entire EIR in this
regard - whether enough information has been offered to provide a
clear, comprehensive view of subject site in relation to adjacent
sites.
a7
• 0
Response 6: The Draft EIR discusses the site as to its location in the
regional and local content. Adjacent properties are discussed in
Draft EIR and in the preceding responses. The determination of
• the sufficiency of information to make a judgement on this
project is the responsibility of the ultimate decision - maker.
Comment 7: EIR insufficiently explores alternatives. Additional
alternatives such as 3A, which could have made a more complete
and comprehensive recreational facility, were not adequately
addressed.
Response 7: The Draft EIR notes that the retention of the remaining 1,1000
feet of Jasmine Creek in its existing state may prove infeasible.
It should be noted that the proposed project does not preclude
retention of the remaining area in its existing state. This
could only be determined at such time as the adjoining property -
owners (The Irvine Company and Newport /Mesa Unified School
District) were to submit development plans for this area.
The proposed project will create more recreational opportunities
than exist on the site in its existing condition the
opportunities will be passive in nature with the exception of the
bicycle trail. The project does not preclude the transition of
the area into a more active recreational area if that were to be
determined feasible at a latter date.
The Draft EIR describes all alternatives to the project that
could reasonably attain the basic objectives of the project. An
alternative that include all property- owners with an ultimate
design for their properties is not reasonable at present.
Additionally the proposed project will not preclude any presently
know alternative use or design for either adjacent property
owner.
Comment 8: Referring to Environmental Checklist Form, Item 19, Recreation,
this Subcommittee suggests that existing recreation opportunities
might be better than proposed project.
Response 8: The opinion of the subcommittee is noted.
Comment 9. Is there a flood problem? Will future development above the site
worsen the problem?
Response 9: The proposed project will not create any flood control problems
within the area. The addition of curb, gutter, sidewalk and
• other proposed public improvement to Fifth Avenue from the
project site to Marguerite Avenue will lessen or eliminate flood
control problems that currently exist within this area.
FT:nma 4/15/83
,�
9
JACK P. NORRin RCE
CAM Engineering 8c Land Surveying
17662 IRVINE BLVD. SUITE 7. TUSTIN, CALIF. 92680 (714 ) 730 -6410
SCHEDULE OF STANDARD
HOURLY RATES
Registered Engineer
$ 50.00
Licensed Land Surveyor
46.00
Designer and Supervisor
40.00
Draftsman and Technician
34.00
Clerical
20.00
Survey Crew (3 -man)
112.00
(2 -man)
90.00
(1 -man)
64.00
The above fees will be escalated 6% on each August 1,
beginning August 1, 1983, for any work uncompleted at
that time through no fault of Engineer. Outside agency
fees and reproductions are not included in above fees
and will be billed at cost plus 10 %.
Periodic progress billings will be made for work completed,
based upon percentage of completion.
•
•
0
City of Newport Beach
City Council/ Planning Department
3300 W. Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Dear Mayor Hart and Council Members:
Re: Comments on Oasis Park Grading EIS
i
519 Iris Avcntu: t4`1J.
Corona do X262
April 1',
APR d 8 19830,
RECfi
Cry r K
AGEAU
We understand that an EIR is supposed to be a disinterested thin,
party': evaluation of a� project according to given guidelines, This is prac-
tically a staff written report extolling staff's point of view and with only their
input.
Nowhere are we presented why the project is being undertaken except
for the statement that funds are in the budget. We believe this project is
being undertaken to install the storm drain along 5th Avenue so that develop-
ment can proceed.
As we recollect staff was to consider two alternatives Concept 3 and
a second plan involving grading the surface to the level of Oasis parking
lot. This has not been done.
A picture of such a concept has been sketched in Figure 3A. The land
being flat is useable for active park land in the future and play area im-
mediately. It would allow moving the Youth Center down onto fill near the
bicycle path on City property without loss of CYC parking (See attached -
Figure 3). It would allow the sand playground to become part of the park
rather than hidden from view, It would facilitate widening of 5th from
Larkspur to Jasmine.
It would discourage children from using the slopes toward the alley
by returning them to Z to 1 as originally planned,
It is our belief that the project should not take place until the slope
• rights from the school board and the greenbelt dedication from Irvine is
dedicated. With sufficient dedication and fill,a true recreation area with
ball fields over the filled creek can be developed. The upper area can
either be a green belt along the creek up to the dam or a filled greenbelt
area over the creek bed.
•
i •
City Council/ Planning Dept.
April 15, 1983
Page Two
We oppose the presently proposed plan. It is not a park. Secondly,
the grades and compacted fill form a ready roadbed for a to be developed
5th Avenue from Jasmine to Iris. Thirdly, it leaves a large mound of dirt
as exists presently which obstructs views along 5th Avenue. The flatter
terrain blocks less views and provides a potentially useable park.
We conclude with the statement that the staff proposal should not be
built. It is bad for the community, The Irvine Co. proposed a creek de-
velopment. We would prefer this to a greenbelt which is both unusable and
unused. We believe the staff is being two -faced to say that Harbor .View
School although gated is available for recreation and then refuse to repair
the Youth Center since they cannot depend on land use of the school portion
of Grant Howald Park in the future. It seems funny how plenty of money
is available for making a useless greenbelt but nothing is available to de-
velop a useful park or buy minimal growth acreage around Oasis, Wouldn't
• it be great if the School Board, Irvine and PB &R got together and developed
something useful. If not,let's leave the area as it is.
�Very truly yours,
Richard A. Nichols
Ll
0
ulk
11,
WQ-
I
A*0 op
Cl
ulk
11,
WQ-
I
•
•
e�.Lo -1 n I Njmkiy
cc