Coastal Commission raises doubts about Banning Ranch Staff members of powerful state agency unsure whether the proposed Newport Beach development would meet the required standards. By Mike Reicher January 19, 2012 | 9:08 p.m.
In their first critique of the Banning Ranch development plans, California Coastal Commission staff members found that the proposed project would be unlikely to meet state standards. Banning Ranch would likely destroy sensitive habitat, develop on wetlands and otherwise trip up state law governing coastal development, according to a review of the draft environmental impact report (EIR) submitted to Newport Beach city planners.
One of the last large undeveloped parcels in the region, Banning Ranch has been the subject of much debate. Preservationists have criticized the owner's plans, while others argue that the proposal is the best chance to clean decades of oil drilling pollution. Now, the powerful Coastal Commission has planted its first marker in the long approvals process.
Its November review found that "the proposed development would result in the elimination of habitat supporting sensitive species" and "the fragmentation of habitat on the site" would be inconsistent with the Coastal Act, the main body of law that governs development near the state's coastline.
A representative from the developer, Newport Banning Ranch LLC, was not immediately available for comment Thursday.
According to the draft EIR, scientists identified several species within the project area that qualify as threatened or endangered, including the coastal California gnatcatcher. One of the premises of the development plans is that more than half of the land would be set aside for wetlands restoration, habitat conservation or preservation. But the commission letter emphasizes that sensitive habitats have to be avoided, and cannot be disturbed and then replanted elsewhere.
A proposed access road from West Coast Highway would likely be rejected because it would threaten sensitive habitat, the letter states. In November, the commission nearly rejected the city's application for the adjacent Sunset Ridge Park because of the same reason, but the city withdrew its application.
Besides coastal sage scrub and other habitat for birds, the wetlands would also likely be threatened, the letter says. The developer should reevaluate which areas count as wetlands, the commission review recommends, because Newport Banning Ranch LLC may have mischaracterized some areas. Scientists have also identified the San Diego fairy shrimp, a protected species, on the 400-acre property * * * * * * Newport Crest Tabling Event Suzanne Forster 01/15/2012
Hats off to the Concerned Residents and all other volunteers!
Another job well done! Thank you all so much for your participation and support. We had lots of traffic and just about talked ourselves hoarse yesterday, explaining the impacts to Newport Crest of the proposed development. We added 70+ names to our mailing list and sold several tee-shirts and collected donations for the Conservancy. Thanks to Bill Bennett for making the materials available!
Thanks to everyone who manned the table. There are too many names to list, but it was very gratifying to see the turnout. Also, thanks to those of you who couldn't participate at the tabling, but were with us in spirit. And to those who helped distribute flyers. Cathy Malkemus covered over half the courtyards for us--and did it in record time!
Thanks to everyone who helped us set up and break down when it was over, and as always, thanks to Dorothy Kraus for her magnificent organizational skills and for doing table duty with me from 9 to 4, with only a short break. Next time we'll try to schedule table duty so it isn't an all-day effort for anyone.
Again, hats off to the committee for all of your efforts on behalf of Newport Crest! Without you, it wouldn't get done.
* * * * * *
California Coastal Commission comments on the Banning Ranch dEIR 01/14/2012
The California Coastal Commission submitted some very interesting comments on the Banning Ranch Development Draft Environmental Impact Report. Two of the most interesting comments are on the planned Coast Hightway entrance (Bluff Road) and biological resoures:
"The proposed project includes a four lane arterial from West Coast Highway to access the subject site. Coastal Commission Staff recently analyzed the habitat resources present in the footprint of the proposed road in processing the Coastal Development Permit for Sunset Ridge Park by the City of Newport Beach. Staff has determined that a four lane arterial road in the proposed location would result in significant, unavoidable impacts to ESHA. Therefore, staff has determined that the proposed arterial road would be inconsistent with the Coastal Act. Therefore, the EIR should more fully consider alternative intensities of development on the site and alternative means to access the property, and should not rely on access from West Coast Highway, as such access would likely be found to be inconsistent with the Coastal Act."
"Section 4.6-4, the Biological Resources chapter, alleges to list the permanent and temporary biological impacts of the project but completely fails to provide sufficient detail of the specific project components that cause the alleged impacts. Thus, the chapter does not provide sufficient detail to enable the general public to meaningfully consider the impacts associated with the project. Rather, the DEIR states generally the number of acres that will be impacted from the proposed development. Without specific analysis related to how each component of the proposed project impacts the biological resources, there cannot be a meaningful analysis of cumulative impacts, mitigation measures or feasible alternatives that may enable the applicant to redesign certain components to lessen any impact the project may have on the environment. This level of detail is particularly important for the Commission when it reviews projects to determine the extent of cumulative impacts from a project and its consideration of whether or not the proposal identifies the proper mitigation and/or alternatives for those impacts. Please include more specific detail regarding the site plans for each proposed structure, grading component, or other development, as defined in section 30106 of the Coastal Act, and the expected biological impact from the proposed development."
* * * * * * 19th Street Bridge By SEAN GREENE / FOR THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER 01/07/2010 - 9:37 am
HUNTINGTON BEACH — Hundreds crammed inside the auditorium of Eader Elementary School to overwhelmingly voice their opposition to the idea of another bridge uniting Huntington Beach and Costa Mesa.
Orange County Supervisor John Moorlach and Surf City Mayor Don Hansen held a meeting Thursday night to seek residents' feedback on the controversial 19th Street Bridge, which would connect 19th Street in Costa Mesa and Banning Avenue in Huntington Beach over the Santa Ana River. Article Tab: image1-Hundreds oppose bridge linking H.B., Costa Mesa ADVERTISEMENT
Homemade signs, stickers and public comments made it clear the crowd at Eader Elementary was stacked against the idea of the bridge. A choir of boos often rang out from the audience, including "No bridge!" and "Save 19th Street!" which would likely be widened to accommodate bridge traffic.
Bridge supporters have said the linkage would play a role in revitalizing Costa Mesa's west side, as well as relieve traffic issues in Newport Beach.
The idea has been formally opposed by both Huntington Beach and Costa Mesa for decades. Newport Beach, by policy, supports the idea, which has remained on the county's master plan of highways for 60 years.
At an estimated cost of $150 million, the project would require the unanimous approval of the Huntington Beach, Costa Mesa and Newport Beach city councils to either build it or forever strike the idea from the master plan.
Elected representatives present at the meeting also made their opinions clear.
"Huntington Beach opposes this and will continue to oppose this," Hansen told the audience. "This meeting is not going to change that ... (but) leadership sometimes requires us to take up those issues."
Talks of the 19th Street Bridge have emerged about every 10 years since the idea was placed on the county's master plan of highways in 1957.
Eighteen years ago, Moorlach, a Costa Mesa resident, made his first appearance before the Orange County Board of Supervisors to oppose both the 19th Street Bridge and the Gisler/Garfield connection, which has since been removed from the master plan.
But late last year, Moorlach revived the talks, first involving council representatives and city managers, at the request of Newport Beach Councilman Steve Rosansky, who wanted to bring the issue back before he was termed out, Moorlach said between talking to residents, many of whom thanked him for his support in opposing the bridge. Rosansky was present at the meeting.
"Has the public sentiment changed? Yes or no?" Moorlach said of the meeting's goal. "And I may be thinking the answer is no."
During the public comment section of the meeting, a number of arguments surfaced against the bridge. Residents of southeast Huntington Beach said a bridge would destroy the quiet character of their neighborhood and increase traffic on Banning Avenue at the risk of the Eader Elementary students. Many also brought up noise and pollution from bridge construction.
"You might think we're all saying 'not in my backyard,'" said Kathleen Mooney of Huntington Beach. "This is a matter of quality of life and considering options. ... Maybe all of us can come up with another way."
Homeowners on West 19th in Costa Mesa have mobilized in a grassroots campaign to oppose both the bridge and the Newport Banning Ranch development. Residents said they believe if either are built, their homes would be taken using eminent domain to expand the two-lane street to accommodate more traffic flow.
Steve Ray, executive director of the Banning Ranch Conservancy, said the building of the 19th Street bridge would facilitate the Newport Banning Ranch development's construction. That means a loss of the opportunity to create a regional park out of the Banning Ranch open space, Talbert Nature Preserve and Fairview Park, he said.
"That land is supposed to be preserved forever," Ray said. "This is not a standalone issue."
Many supported the notion of removing the bridge, marked by a dotted line on a map, from the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways, which would forever kill the idea.
But doing so is not so simple. First, alternative measures to mitigate traffic without the bridge would have to be taken, Moorlach said.
"How do we move people around? Because Westside Costa Mesa is not easy to navigate," he said.
A number of city officials were present at the meeting.
Six out of seven Huntington Beach City Council members were present, excluding Councilman Keith Bohr, who Mayor Hansen said had a prior commitment.
The Huntington Beach City Council will vote whether to reaffirm its status quo, "no" stance on the 19th Street Bridge at its Jan. 17 meeting.
Costa Mesa Councilwoman Wendy Leece was also present, along with a handful of City Hall executives, to report back to her council. Leece said she stands by her city's 1993 resolution opposing the bridge.
Costa Mesa Councilman Steve Mensinger took note of the opposition, but would not publicly say if he thought having a bridge was right or wrong.
"If the public doesn't want it, we're not going to have it," Mensinger said. "I'm not going to support a bridge that they don't want. ... (But) we have to deal with traffic."
From Newport Beach, Councilwoman Leslie Daigle said she was there to listen and report back to her council.
* * * * * * 19th Street Bridge Daily Pilot January 2, 2012 | 8:18 p.m. By Eleanor Egan
To bridge or not to bridge? Is that the question?
No, first we need to know where we want to go, then we can decide whether a bridge over the Santa Ana River at West 19th Street will take us there, or to some other place we definitely don't want to go.
Surely we don't want Costa Mesa to become like Downey, "where the freeways meet," nor like the cities along the Santa Ana (5) and San Diego (405) freeways, where the din of traffic starts at 5:30 in the morning and roars on past midnight. We'd much rather live in a place with air you can breathe and homes you can relax in, where you hear children at play in the daytime and leaves rustling at night.
Until recently, the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH) showed several bridges across the Santa Ana River, including at Gisler Avenue and West 19th. These were arbitrarily drawn as part of a plan adopted when the area was mostly farmland. Planners also proposed extending both the Costa Mesa (55) and the Orange (57) freeways southward to Pacific Coast Highway.
The MPAH is not a sacred script; it has been modified. About 20 years ago, the city of Newport Beach succeeded in having the 55 terminated at 19th Street and Newport Boulevard, in the heart of downtown Costa Mesa.
Just a few years ago, the cities of Costa Mesa, Fountain Valley and Huntington Beach vigorously opposed extending the 57 south of the 405 and shot down construction of the Gisler and 19th Street bridges; we thought we had killed and buried that entire ill-conceived plan. Relying on that success, Costa Mesa changed the zoning, allowing homeowners along West 19th to make long-delayed improvements to their properties. The entire neighborhood was upgraded as a result.
But now a county supervisor and a Costa Mesa City Council member have exhumed the plan. The 19th Street Bridge is rising, zombie-like, to haunt Costa Mesa from west to east.
Such a bridge would divert regional and interstate traffic away from PCH to local streets, clogging arteries in the heart of Costa Mesa's downtown, exacerbating the gridlock around Triangle Square and making it harder and less appealing for potential customers to patronize businesses in and around Triangle Square.
As long as a 19th Street bridge remains on the MPAH, it harms Costa Mesa because the existence of a bridge on paper allows Costa Mesa's neighbors to develop their lands to maximum intensity. They can treat this "paper bridge" in their environmental impact reports as though it were real. This allows them to approve major, high-intensity development projects, such as Banning Ranch, that they could not approve in the absence of a theoretical bridge.
The result of higher-intensity development in neighboring cities will be more and more regional commuter and truck traffic on Costa Mesa's local streets, which were not designed nor built to carry regional traffic. The increased traffic will eventually force the widening of those narrow streets by tearing down homes and businesses and further increase pressure to actually construct a bridge, further degrading residents' quality of life.
Far from revitalizing the Westside as the bridge's proponents claim, a 19th Street bridge clearly would adversely impact everyone who lives, works or owns a business or real property nearby. It would serve only the interests of developers and their supporters in local government who pay little attention to the effects of their business activities on the people who suffer from them.
If you think the people who want a bridge at West 19th are doing this to ease the plight of commuters, I know some developers who may have a bridge to sell you. The only real solution is to delete the "paper bridge" from the MPAH once and for all.
Receive updates
If you are an individual or an organization and wish to receive updates and information from the Banning Ranch Conservancy, please join our mailing list today!
Newport Crest of the proposed development. We added 70+ names to our mailing list and sold several tee-shirts and collected donations for the Conservancy. Thanks to Bill Bennett for making the materials available!
